Do you think low carb is healthy ?

flowerpot

I follow mostly a low carb diet. I eat 5 or 6 times a day and try to eat mostly organic. I lost my bloated belly and honestly it does seem to really work for me.
However, as much as i like having a flat tummy, never feeling hungry and really enjoying the food I have young kids and my priority is to be healthy. As this diet goes against the traditional' food pyramid' that is recommended by health professionals I'm wondering is it actually a healthy way to live. Being skinny is not as important to me as being healthy is.
Here is an example of what i eat
Breakfast: fried steak (organic) / 2 Eggs
Snack : Handful of nuts and green apple
Lunch: Chicken( organic) with green veg
Snack : slice of cheese and portion of berries
Dinner: Fish with salad/veg
So I suppose my question to who ever follows this diet is- Do you think it is a healthy way to eat long term.
I did get my cholesterol checked and it was 5.3 not terribly bad but a lot higher to 2 years ago where it was 4.6 . Should you be concerned about cholesterol on this diet ? What about too much protein. Isn't too much protein supposed to be bad for your kidneys ?
Would be interested in what other low carbers think ?

Jumpy

My cholesterol has gone down on low carb. My skin has improved, my IBS is pretty much gone.
Apart from being BORING. I havent a bad word to say about it.

Sapsorrow

Personally I think it's too extreme, a carb conscious diet is a good thing in a lot of ways but I don't think it should be quite so extreme. I completely agree with uping veg (it should form the base of the pyramid in my opinion), cutting out refined grains and all sugar dense foods. But really there's no real harm to small-moderate amounts of unprossed whole grains like brown rice etc..
I think you're eating way to much protein/meat to be healthy, it's too hard on the kidneys and your liver.
My main prob with the diet is that it's so dependant on meat, eggs and dairy, I really don't see the harm in subsituting lentils and beans in despite their carb content, I mean it's really not going to do anyone any harm carbs or no.
My toxicology prof used to work with a guy called colin T campell who rote the china study, basically this guy is a really good scientist (althought the meat and dairy industry in the US do their best to make people think otherwise even though he started out working as a scientist for them!) and has conducted masses of research on detrimental effects on animal protein with regard to cancer and tbh the research is frankly shocking.
Also vegans and vegetarians are consistently found to have better health indicators and outcomes in studies. While I'm not suggesting that eating meat is all bad I think eating in thes quantities is unwise and contradictory to our innate common sense.
Any food, chemical or medicine can become toxic if consumed in excess, this is the primary principle of toxicology and I think that high an intake of meat/animal protein is more damaging than eating some carb rich wholefoods. While there are benifits to low carbing like losing weight and people feel good on it it completely contradicts the scientific consensus in the field of nutrition so if you feel you are in a position to go against the opinions of the majority of the professionals thats your call really.
Also not to go too far off topic but what about the environmental impact of eating so much meat and fish? I never see anyone address this issue in relation to low carb? It's not very environmentally friendly and seems like it's going in the complete opposite direction of where we should in the future.
If there's one thing we are sure of it is the need to try and preserve what little shambles is left of the planet for generations to come and the only way we can help is in our little seemingly insignificant daily decisions and actions and unsustainalble diets like these aren't necessarily going to be feesable in the future.

I can sit back now and await the storm.. it's a very pro-low carb forum

brianthebard

OP the food pyramid you refer to was developed to promote the grain industry in the US.
Protein is only damaging to your kidneys if you have a kidney condition, otherwise it is not bad for them.
Carbs are the one macronutrient you can function 100% perfectly without, so low carb is not going to damage your health unless you eat excessive amounts of bad fats and over processed meats.

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

OP the food pyramid you refer to was developed to promote the grain industry in the US.
Protein is only damaging to your kidneys if you have a kidney condition, otherwise it is not bad for them.
Carbs are the one macronutrient you can function 100% perfectly without, so low carb is not going to damage your health unless you eat excessive amounts of bad fats and over processed meats.

Have you something to back up that food pyramid statement with? The meat and dairy industry have been involved in some pretty sinister marketing and health promotion campaigns themselves over the years.
As I mentioned earlier, the research is not conclusive that this diet is healthy in the lung run and it does run contradictory to the scientific consensus, so I can't really see who on an internet chat forum could the credibility to argue without a doubt against the conclusion of the people who've dedicated their careers specialising in this science. And they're not all suckers who're sucked into the whole food pyramid thing or are being paid off by the cereal industry. Not many idiots make it to the top of the university/research ladder.

brianthebard

The link between the grain industry and the food pyramid put out by the FDA has been too well covered for me to need to provide a link, if you don't know about it then I suggest you look it up yourself. Also there is no point in mentioning other industries misdeeds as cover for carbs, we all know that the food industry has been equally bad at times, that is hardly a reason to stop eating anything, or continue eating everything.
What is the conclusion of these specialists then? That there is no conclusion according to your post. You are contradicting yourself within the space of two lines.
How about you post research proving that low carb is bad for you, then your post might have some weight?
Also could you provide evidence as to why the OP is eating too much protein? I think it is extremely unhelpful of you to suggest the op is eating too much meat and will be sicker than vegetarians because research into the meat industry, when the op clearly states that they eat organic meat.

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

Also there is no point in mentioning other industries misdeeds as cover for carbs, we all know that the food industry has been equally bad at times, that is hardly a reason to stop eating anything, or continue eating everything.
What is the conclusion of these specialists then? That there is no conclusion according to your post. You are contradicting yourself within the space of two lines.
How about you post research proving that low carb is bad for you, then your post might have some weight?
Also could you provide evidence as to why the OP is eating too much protein? I think it is extremely unhelpful of you to suggest the op is eating too much meat and will be sicker than vegetarians because research into the meat industry, when the op clearly states that they eat organic meat.

Your first point is a contradiction in itself, just because the FDA may have formed the food pyramid with underlying political economic motives does not mean that it has not since been reviewed as new research has emerged. It has.
I was not contradicting myself, more research is needed before anyone can say without a doubt that it is safe. My point was that the current reccomendations are based on a spectrum of studies, it's not as simple as being black and white.Therefore a panel of experts is required to balance up the evidence from the best of every type of study and try to make to the most informed and unbiased decision possible. Which is what public health professionals do when they are developing or reviewing these sort of guidlines and policies. If the conclusion was the low carb is the best way for people to eat then they would put the wheels in motion to adjust the guidelines.
I happen to have a fairly good idea of what's going on in this respect my public health lecturer and boss last summer is a prominant scientist in policy making for Europe and I have spoken to him about this topic in particular at length after I read the diet delusion.
I wasn't saying that the OP will be sicker than a vegetarian, I was simply pointing out that a significant amount of the research and in particular the epidemiological research indicates that moderate or low meat consumption is associated with better health outcomes in terms of chronic disease rates and biomarkers and this has often been found to be the case in vegetarians and vegans also. You can't simply pick and choose the research that suits your opinions you have to evaluate the sum total of the best research and generally only a trained professional has the background knowledge time and resources to do this.
I just feel that it's not right to gaurantee someone looking for advice that what they're doing is absolutley not going to do them any long term harm if your not a health care professional (maybe you are) and therefore feel an obligation to make them aware of the other side of the arguement so they can look into it further themselves.
I have better things to do tbh than go off sourcing reviews to back myself up when I'm in de middle of exams and writing my lit review with a dial up internet connection. I'm not concerned with proving myself to anyone on something like boards, rather I'm trying to help the op as she asked for advice.

corkcomp

khrystyna100 wrote: »

You can't simply pick and choose the research that suits your opinions

unfortunately, people almost always will!

metamorphosis

For most healthy and normally functioning people - Eating low carb or lower carb is no more or less dangerous that introducing some healthy grains and fruit into a persons diet.

OP - the diet above is very nutritious. If your kids are highly active or play sports it might be no harm introducing some complex carbs like wholegrain rice or oats or throwing in some more fruit.

Whatever suits to be honest. If you want, are healthy on and like low carb and it suits the home lifestyle then stay with it. If not - then make changes.

corkcomp

ULstudent wrote: »

For most healthy and normally functioning people - Eating low carb or lower carb is no more or less dangerous that introducing some healthy grains and fruit into a persons diet.

OP - the diet above is very nutritious. If your kids are highly active or play sports it might be no harm introducing some complex carbs like wholegrain rice or oats or throwing in some more fruit.

Whatever suits to be honest. If you want, are healthy on and like low carb and it suits the home lifestyle then stay with it. If not - then make changes.

yep, what he said! fruit and whole grains wont do you any harm, nor will healthy fats or proteins. perosnally i dont see the need to completely cut out anything, but if you do then please research it and fully understand pros and cons rather than just doing it because you read about it on the interweb!

ragg

There is no real problem with carbs. they have their place - energy for activity is one of them. The problem with modern carbs, is the processing they go through to get to your plate.
If you eat carbs in their natural form, you will be fine!
if you eat processed carbs & simple sugars alot IMO you will have health issues in later life

Sapsorrow

OP if you plan on maintaining this long term then just make sure your drink lots of pure water and consider a calcium or multi-mineral supplement and above all else pay attention to your body and try and find a good honest doctor to have the odd check up to make sure things are still going well behind the scenes.
At the end of the day you have no reason to have any faith in any of us to be advising you on matters to do with your health, you have no idea what credibility anyone on a discussion forum has so the best thing to do is try and educated yourself as best you can, be discerning in what material you give credit to whilst also trying to get information from both sides of every story and if you have any real problems go see a nutritionist or dietician. Tbh it is extremely difficult for any lay person without a good background in science to really be able to plough through the nutritional jargon out there so you can rarely be completely sure of anything. Otherwise all you're really doing is assuming that what you're reading is honest and well researched, any good journalist or author can make anything sound credible.
I would say though that if you're so unsure of a diet and the health implications in the first place maybe you should spend more time researching in the first place before you make such drastic lifestlye changes.

brianthebard

khrystyna100 wrote: »

Your first point is a contradiction in itself, just because the FDA may have formed the food pyramid with underlying political economic motives does not mean that it has not since been reviewed as new research has emerged. It has.

I think you misunderstand what a contradiction is.

I wasn't saying that the OP will be sicker than a vegetarian, I was simply pointing out that a significant amount of the research and in particular the epidemiological research indicates that moderate or low meat consumption is associated with better health outcomes in terms of chronic disease rates and biomarkers and this has often been found to be the case in vegetarians and vegans also. You can't simply pick and choose the research that suits your opinions you have to evaluate the sum total of the best research and generally only a trained professional has the background knowledge time and resources to do this.

I don't intend to pick and choose the research, I do intend to interpret it correctly though. Of course if vegetarians are compared to unhealthy people eating happy meals they will show up healthier, but you would have to provide a study comparing vegetarians to the op's organic meat diet to make your statement valid. Your blanket statement is unhelpful.

I just feel that it's not right to gaurantee someone looking for advice that what they're doing is absolutley not going to do them any long term harm if your not a health care professional (maybe you are) and therefore feel an obligation to make them aware of the other side of the arguement so they can look into it further themselves.
I have better things to do tbh than go off sourcing reviews to back myself up when I'm in de middle of exams and writing my lit review with a dial up internet connection. I'm not concerned with proving myself to anyone on something like boards, rather I'm trying to help the op as she asked for advice.

I think you should withdraw your comment about protein's 'harmful effect on the liver and kidneys' since it was made without any basis and has not been backed up with anything. It is extremely uphelpful for people to make statements in this forum that amount to scaremongering about another person's diet, when that person is trying their best to be healthy and follow best practises.

b12mearse

op low carb in the long run isnt good for you especially when your eating large quantities of meat at the same time. meat should be eaten 3 times a week at most for optimal health.

EileenG

b12mearse wrote: »

op low carb in the long run isnt good for you especially when your eating large quantities of meat at the same time. meat should be eaten 3 times a week at most for optimal health.

Proof?

What gets me is that you'll get lots of experts explaining why low carb is so bad and dangerous, but if you say you are going to eat low gi, you'll get patted on the head and told you are being sensible.

There are lots of variations of low carb. People often think of keto (Atkins induction) as low carb, but that's only one way, and by far the strictest. Most low -carbers avoid sugar, white bread and pasta, biscuits, cakes and ready foods. Hard to make an arguement for those.

And in general, a good low gi diet will also be low in refined carbs.

b12mearse

EileenG wrote: »

Proof?

What gets me is that you'll get lots of experts explaining why low carb is so bad and dangerous, but if you say you are going to eat low gi, you'll get patted on the head and told you are being sensible.

There are lots of variations of low carb. People often think of keto (Atkins induction) as low carb, but that's only one way, and by far the strictest. Most low -carbers avoid sugar, white bread and pasta, biscuits, cakes and ready foods. Hard to make an arguement for those.

And in general, a good low gi diet will also be low in refined carbs.

common sense!
meat is the biggest contributer to cancer and cardiovuscular disease.
carbohydrates are the most important source of energy for the body.

and this isnt the first time that you have been mis-informing people!

ladyA

My main issue with "low carbing" is that a diet rich in meat, cheese, dairy etc is incredibly acid forming in the body which is a pre-cursor for the development of disease. Generally, We should be eating twice as much alkaline forming foods as acid forming foods for good health.
I think people should look more at low grain rather than low carb. The limitation of quantites of fruit and veg in the diet because of their carb content is absurd. There is no doubt that most grains do the body no good and in my opinion beans and legumes can have similar effects. I think people contribute positive effects of low carb diets to the large amounts of protein they are eating when in fact it is the elimination of grains from the diet that produces these very same effects. Research indicates that a diet which is predominatly from fruit/veg carbohydrates and supplemented with healthy fats and protein is the one which seems to create the best conditions for a healthy body. (Hence Vegetarians/Vegans consistently performing well in such tests)

brianthebard

b12mearse wrote: »

common sense!
meat is the biggest contributer to cancer and cardiovuscular disease.
carbohydrates are the most important source of energy for the body.

and this isnt the first time that you have been mis-informing people!

Lets have some proof for those wild claims now. carbs aren't the most important energy source, they are an energy source, like fat and protein.

EileenG

ladyA wrote: »

My main issue with "low carbing" is that a diet rich in meat, cheese, dairy etc is incredibly acid forming in the body which is a pre-cursor for the development of disease. Generally, We should be eating twice as much alkaline forming foods as acid forming foods for good health.
I think people should look more at low grain rather than low carb. The limitation of quantites of fruit and veg in the diet because of their carb content is absurd. There is no doubt that most grains do the body no good and in my opinion beans and legumes can have similar effects. I think people contribute positive effects of low carb diets to the large amounts of protein they are eating when in fact it is the elimination of grains from the diet that produces these very same effects. Research indicates that a diet which is predominatly from fruit/veg carbohydrates and supplemented with healthy fats and protein is the one which seems to create the best conditions for a healthy body. (Hence Vegetarians/Vegans consistently performing well in such tests)

Agree about the low grain, but any GOOD low carb diet will have a huge amount of green veg in it which is great for countering excess acidity. Most low carbers don't eat more meat than the average Irish person, but they do replace the pasta/bread/spuds with lots of extra veg.

Anyone who reads my posts on low carb will have a hard time finding me telling people to curtail veg in any way. I usually tell them to eat more damn broccoli.

EileenG

I don't agree that vegetarian is healthier. You certainly CAN have a very good veggie diet, but you can also have a bad one, and many Irish vegetarians practically live on bread, pasta and cheese.

I used to be vegetarian for about 20 years. I was fit and healthy, lifted weights, cycled hard, ate organic as much as possible. I did have various minor health problems, like gallstones and heartburn, but could live with them. Then I got pregnant and wanted the odd bit of meat. Had my baby, started breastfeeding and wanted meat four times a day, starting with black pudding for breakfast. Major shock for an ex-vegetarian!!

Since I've switched to a much lower carb diet, the heartburn and gallstones have gone away. I low carb, not because it's a fashion but because it's the diet I feel most healthy on.

Went to Horslips yesterday, didn't have time to get a proper low carb meal, so I grabbed a bagel on the way. I spent the whole evening battling heartburn.

b12mearse

brianthebard wrote: »

Lets have some proof for those wild claims now. carbs aren't the most important energy source, they are an energy source, like fat and protein.

where you going with your 'wild claims'?
look it up yourself. if you have ever studied nutrition you would know this.

wild claims? lol

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

Lets have some proof for those wild claims now. carbs aren't the most important energy source, they are an energy source, like fat and protein.

Yer mad for your 'scientific evidence' aren't you! Do you honestly think the other poster or myslef couldn't come up with plenty of credible research if we tried? I could probably find research linking the consumption to of salt and vinegar crisps to decreased risk of chicken pox if I tried. It would be just as easy as it would be for you to find papers to back your opinions up which is why I made my points earlier about a trained scientific committee coming up with a consensus on all the available research and low and behold coming up with our dietary guidelines which do not reccomend cutting out all or nearly all carbs

brianthebard

b12mearse wrote: »

where you going with your 'wild claims'?
look it up yourself. if you have ever studied nutrition you would know this.

wild claims? lol

Have you studied nutrition? Where? Did they tell you the difference between something being possibly linked to and definitely causing cancer? Did they tell you the difference between organic meat cuts and fast food processed meat? yes indeed you are making wild claims-lol.

brianthebard

khrystyna100 wrote: »

Yer mad for your 'scientific evidence' aren't you! Do you honestly think the other poster or myslef couldn't come up with plenty of credible research if we tried? I could probably find research linking the consumption to of salt and vinegar crisps to decreased risk of chicken pox if I tried. It would be just as easy as it would be for you to find papers to back your opinions up which is why I made my points earlier about a trained scientific committee coming up with a consensus on all the available research and low and behold coming up with our dietary guidelines which do not reccomend cutting out all or nearly all carbs

You're mad to avoid giving scientific evidence aren't you? (note that I never used that term, dunno why you have it in quotations). Here's a thought, if its so easy to provide the evidence, why don't you? I'm still waiting for you to take back your statement about protein being damaging for the liver and kidneys. When you've done that I'd be interested in your crisps=chicken pox paper, but not til then.

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

Have you studied nutrition? Where? Did they tell you the difference between something being possibly linked to and definitely causing cancer? Did they tell you the difference between organic meat cuts and fast food processed meat? yes indeed you are making wild claims-lol.

I study nutritional science do you or have you?
It's not a wild claim, true the poster shoudn't have said it definately does cause cancer because no one in nutrition ever has a right to say anything without a doubt like that (or very rarely does).
But we have looked at the connections between meat consumption and cancer in my course, it's not just to do with nitrates in processed meat so there is potential for organic meats to play a role in it also. Proposed mechanisms are slowing of gut transit time allowing for putrefaction and toxicity to the gut endothelial cells, the redox potential of the iron, and roles in cancer initiation, progression and tumourigenesis. It really isn't as whacked out a theory (theories plural in fact) as you'd like to make out.

b12mearse

brianthebard wrote: »

Have you studied nutrition? Where? Did they tell you the difference between something being possibly linked to and definitely causing cancer? Did they tell you the difference between organic meat cuts and fast food processed meat? yes indeed you are making wild claims-lol.

I don't think you have a clue what your talking about. Don't embarrass yourself any further.

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

You're mad to avoid giving scientific evidence aren't you? (note that I never used that term, dunno why you have it in quotations). Here's a thought, if its so easy to provide the evidence, why don't you? I'm still waiting for you to take back your statement about protein being damaging for the liver and kidneys. When you've done that I'd be interested in your crisps=chicken pox paper, but not til then.

Because as I said in my post I could if I wanted to and ANYONE with any experience using nutritional science databases would know that I could, like I said I could find research to back almost any claim up. And I also cannot be bothered for this reason.

brianthebard

khrystyna100 wrote: »

I study nutritional science do you or have you?
It's not a wild claim, true the poster shoudn't have said it definately does cause cancer because no one in nutrition ever has a right to say anything without a doubt like that (or very rarely does).

I clearly wasn't asking you if you studied nutrition. And it is clearly a wild claim by your own definition. Did you read their claim? it was 'meat is the biggest contributor to cancer and cardiovascular disease'. The biggest? To all cancer? All cardiovascular disease? I understand you want to back up this person cause they agree with you, but you should really distance yourself from these sort of posts.

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

I clearly wasn't asking you if you studied nutrition. And it is clearly a wild claim by your own definition. Did you read their claim? it was 'meat is the biggest contributor to cancer and cardiovascular disease'. The biggest? To all cancer? All cardiovascular disease? I understand you want to back up this person cause they agree with you, but you should really distance yourself from these sort of posts.

Pease read my posts more carefully before you respond, I clearly stated that the other poster didn't express themselves professionally and if you looked over some of my other posts you would see that I often thank or empathise with people who have different opinions to myself if they are reasonable, intelligent and express themselve properly.
I corrected the claim by saying that there is a likely role for meat consumption in certain cancers NOT that I agreed with the other posters claim that it is the largest contributry factor.

Sapsorrow

brianthebard wrote: »

Have you studied nutrition? Where? Did they tell you the difference between something being possibly linked to and definitely causing cancer? Did they tell you the difference between organic meat cuts and fast food processed meat? yes indeed you are making wild claims-lol.

I know you weren't asking me, but you challenged the other poster to prove their credibility and I am simply asking you the same question as I'm interested to see how you are in such a position to contradict the opinions of my college lecturers and other health care professionals and go on the internet dishing out assurances to people on very extreme diets that what they are doing is completely safe.
Isn't the first clause of the Hyppocratic oath 'first of all cause no harm'

brianthebard

khrystyna100 wrote: »

I know you weren't asking me, but you challenged the other poster to prove their credibility and I am simply asking you the same question as I'm interested to see how you are in such a position to contradict the opinions of my college lecturers and other health care professionals and go on the internet dishing out assurances to people on very extreme diets that what they are doing is completely safe.
Isn't the first clause of the Hyppocratic oath 'first of all cause no harm'

b12 clearly suggested they had studied nutrition, this was what I was responding to. What exactly is extreme about the op's diet? What very extreme diet have I suggested people use? Also, will you please take back your statement about protein being damaging to the liver and kidney's in light of your own reference to the Hippocratic oath? I've asked you this several times now and you repeatedly ignore it.

itsallaboutheL

khrystyna100 wrote: »

I know you weren't asking me, but you challenged the other poster to prove their credibility and I am simply asking you the same question as I'm interested to see how you are in such a position to contradict the opinions of my college lecturers and other health care professionals and go on the internet dishing out assurances to people on very extreme diets that what they are doing is completely safe.
Isn't the first clause of the Hyppocratic oath 'first of all cause no harm'

I have friends with 1.1s in Nut Science from UCC and they're about as credible as a bag of wet socks. Which they will admit themselves.

To be fair none of ye are backing up claims one way or the other, but your posting style in particular doesn't endear you to neutral observers.

Brian can you remember the name of the UCC proff from the Supplement thread in fitness a while back?

brianthebard

lol no I can't but I'll look for it if you like.

edit; is it this lad you're referring to or someone else? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055551563

itsallaboutheL

brianthebard wrote: »

lol no I can't but I'll look for it if you like.

edit; is it this lad you're referring to or someone else? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055551563

Bingo

Sapsorrow

itsallaboutheL wrote: »

I have friends with 1.1s in Nut Science from UCC and they're about as credible as a bag of wet socks. Which they will admit themselves.

To be fair none of ye are backing up claims one way or the other, but your posting style in particular doesn't endear you to neutral observers.

Brian can you remember the name of the UCC proff from the Supplement thread in fitness a while back?

To be fair you can't generalise the whole class becuase your friends are useless, obviously if you haven't got any passion and just learn the material off and then regurgiate it in the exams your not going to be capable of forming any opinions, I am not one of these students and have had a huge ongoing interest in nutrition and actively learn as much as I can about it all the time whilst there are plenty in my class who after nearly four years still don't even really know why they did the course in the firct place.
It's equally unfair to generalise about the staff at UCC because of the actions of one member, if you knew the people in the nutrition department you'd understand why I have such faith in their wisdom.
I'm not interesting in coming across as endearing in particular just in enjoying a lively debate.

EileenG

Keep to the point, and don't get personal, or I'll lock the thread.

BraziliaNZ

red meat is linked to all kinds of cancers. I just don't think it's right to be eating steak and eggs every morning. What's wrong with a bowl of porridge?

corkcomp

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

red meat is linked to all kinds of cancers. I just don't think it's right to be eating steak and eggs every morning. What's wrong with a bowl of porridge?

exactly!

BraziliaNZ

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5538759/Millions-unaware-of-red-meat-cancer-risk.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4662934.stm

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102306407

after reading the likes of the above, I certainly dont think red meat more than once or twice a week is a good idea

brianthebard

bbc wrote:

Their study, published in Cancer Research, found the red meat diet was associated with a higher level of DNA damage.

That's nowhere near conclusive, or even the same as your statement that it is linked to cancer. Furthermore the article gives no indication of what type of meat the people tested were eating, how much, or what the rest of their diet was like. I think a lot of people need to learn how to read these reports critically and not get carried away by headlines.

BraziliaNZ

well I'm glad that I don't eat red meat very often is all

brianthebard

Fair enough. fwiw I'm not denying there might be a link but I think there's specific circumstances that need to be taken into account. But I really do believe people (everyone) needs to be able to think critically about reports on food.

BraziliaNZ

brianthebard wrote: »

Fair enough. fwiw I'm not denying there might be a link but I think there's specific circumstances that need to be taken into account. But I really do believe people (everyone) needs to be able to think critically about reports on food.

of course. But in general, I think less consumption of red meat is better for people and better for the planet.

Gummy Panda

I thought the BBC report was more about red meat and lack of fibre in diet.

The low carb book I read, recommended eating high fibre veg and not just meat on it's own.

itsallaboutheL

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I thought the BBC report was more about red meat and lack of fibre in diet.

The low carb book I read, recommended eating high fibre veg and not just meat on it's own.

This.

I havn't even read the report and was just thinking this.

I'm assuming now...(have too much necessary reading to be doing to fap around) that the links they are talking about is between red meat and colon cancer????

When eating low carb high protein diets the cat on the street knows fibre supplimentation is essential to maintain a healthy and functioning digestive system.

Slugs

b12mearse wrote: »

op low carb in the long run isnt good for you especially when your eating large quantities of meat at the same time. meat should be eaten 3 times a week at most for optimal health.

3 times a week, if that's the case every single bodybuilder and fitness fanatic would be absolutely boned don't you think?

flowerpot

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to reply ..and give your opinon.. it gives me some things to think about and consider..I suppose the difficulty is i feel really good on this.. but it goes against what medical professionals would advise when you look at the food pyramid...

I went on this diet because i suffered from panic attacks and i found it was linked to hyperglycemia ..low blood sugars...
this diet balances out my blood sugars and i eat every 2 to 3 hours so i dont have that big spike of sugar and then crash..
Like after eating a bowl of porridge I'm hungry again within an hour ..i just dont seem to be satisfied.. A small portion of meat and i'm full for hours..
I do think my diet is very healthy I'm getting my 5 portions of fruit and veg every day ..and more some days as i eat large portions of veg.. its a lot better that eating pizzas and slices of toast for breakfast I think personally

When i say i have meat for breakfast every morning I mean i have a portion the size of a deck of cards .. nothing bigger and its almost always organic..

EileenG

For what it's worth, I found a lot of minor health problems cleared up when I went low carb. When I'm with women my own age, I feel like the odd one out because I don't have a list of chronic health problems that are bugging me. For me, that's the real incentive.

flowerpot

For what it's worth, I found a lot of minor health problems cleared up when I went low carb. When I'm with women my own age, I feel like the odd one out because I don't have a list of chronic health problems that are bugging me. For me, that's the real incentive

. []

Eileen if you dont mind me asking what would your typical days diet look like ?

EileenG

It varies a lot, but I'd often have something like a mushroom and herb omlette for breakfast, some sort of fish for lunch, along with whatever vegetables were in the market that are quick to cook. Dinner would be "normal", meat or chicken or stew etc, with lots of veg, and maybe some boiled potatoes for the children. I can make a low carb version of most things now, including lasagne!

Whey after the gym or a hard cycle, perhaps nuts or seeds or cottage cheese as snacks. These days, I tend to keep a big pot of vegetable soup on the go, and heat some up as I need it.

I do not buy peanut butter. It's too damn addictive!

Sapsorrow

EileenG wrote: »

I can make a low carb version of most things now, including lasagne!

Do tell!