Healthy Eating

Damo810

mayota wrote: »

Processed foods are the problem. Look at the people years ago eating big feeds bacon and cabbage, chops, spuds with lashings of real butter. Pints of fresh milk. All from the farm. And they were all thin.

They were also burning everything off though. It was a 4 mile trip to town here by bike, cows had to be milked and their was an off farm job too. How balanced their diet was is debatable though, as their was still a heavy reliance on certain foods.

You also have to look at the average life expectancy too, which has gone up, although advancements in medicine have had a more considerable role to play in that.

The problem with most people is that they don't balance activities and diet. How many people try losing weight by walking everyday but sticking to the same old diet or vice versa. Something will have to be done though, because we are no doubt heading in the wrong direction. There is plenty of rubbish currently in the second level curriculum that could be abolished to allow for regular classes on human nutrition.

whisky_galore

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

The biggest predictor of a long and healthy life isn't diet, it is not smoking and having good social support network around you with strong and loving relationships.

My grandad's cous was a cantankerous, grumpy ould fcuk who lived on his own in a house with an open fire where smoke filled the place, smoked like a chimney himself, ate bacon cabbage and butter and lived to 90.:pac:

ford2600

mikefoxo wrote: »

My father has eaten a diet like that for all his life. Works outside everyday of his life, fit as a fiddle. He had a heart attack last September. Luckily he's okay now, but he always says it's the one thing he thought he'd never get. Just because you look healthy and don't eat a lot of processed food doesn't mean you're fighting fit

How do you know his diet contributed to his heart disease?

reilig

biddy2013 wrote: »

http://brne.ws/gbq

It was on the radio this morning that the Doctor who carried out this study, Dr Longo, has declared interests in (actually, he’s the founder of) L-Nutra – a company that makes ProLon™ – an entirely plant based meal replacement product.

He got some serious headlines for his business. Stop eating meat, fish and veg and go onto meal replacement powders. Did you ever hear such nonsense??

bbam

reilig wrote: »

It was on the radio this morning that the Doctor who carried out this study, Dr Longo, has declared interests in (actually, he’s the founder of) L-Nutra – a company that makes ProLon™ – an entirely plant based meal replacement product.

He got some serious headlines for his business. Stop eating meat, fish and veg and go onto meal replacement powders. Did you ever hear such nonsense??

Its no big headline at all really..

Surely its no news to anyone that if you eat huge ammounts of processed meats that you won't do well on them... The salts and unsaturated fats alone would kill a horse... Americans in particular have a very un natural diet, the have developed an addiction to highly processed foods and their system of regulation, production and subsidies supports it.

There are some shocking documentaries on Netfilx, Farm Inc', Farmagedden and many more..

It was discussed on Mat Cooper yesterday evening..

tabby aspreme

I think synthetic / chemical food ingredients contribute towards a lot of ill health.

If you cook a dinner from fresh produce you probably have no more than 4 to 6ingredients, meat, spuds, veg, and maybe some cooking oil ,butter, milk, all of which you can recognise as food, as individual items, if you eat a dinner of processed food you could be eating dozens of "food ingredients" most of which are not food in there own right . Kerry Foods produce thousands of these food ingredients none of which you would eat on there own.

mikefoxo

ford2600 wrote: »

How do you know his diet contributed to his heart disease?

Hospital said his cholesterol was very high - too much red meat and fat (butter and milk)

farmersfriend

I know a woman who lived to 103 and her diet was porridge big dinners and the more fat was on the meat the better she liked it. New spuds would be covered in butter and salt. And if she thought she was getting a kidney infection she would drink gin and in to bed and wake up right as rain - they don't make them like that anymore.

bbam

farmersfriend wrote: »

I know a woman who lived to 103 and her diet was porridge big dinners and the more fat was on the meat the better she liked it. New spuds would be covered in butter and salt. And if she thought she was getting a kidney infection she would drink gin and in to bed and wake up right as rain - they don't make them like that anymore.

If you talk to any healthcare professional they hate these tales of some auld one up the road who lived the whores life, could carry three grown men in her handbag, lived to be 160 and dug her own grave !!

Public health policy is directed towards the masses. Its a recommendation that if followed should help most people lead a healthy or healthier life than they otherwise would..

It cannot account for individual gene pools who have a predisposition to cancer, heart attacks, diabetes or living to 99.. That's just life. I have high blood pressure, its an inherited thing, I take medication and live as healthily as I can... But in all likelihood it will kill me through stroke or heart attack, them's the cards we're dealt, but chances are if I didn't eat well, watch my weight and exercise I'd be gone much sooner..

ford2600

mikefoxo wrote: »

Hospital said his cholesterol was very high - too much red meat and fat (butter and milk)

Did they explain why France, which consumes more saturated fat than any other country in Europe has very low heart disease? Same from Switzerland who come second in same tables.
Or why the Ukraine which eats very small amounts of saturated fat yet has heart disease through the roof?
Or why aboriginies have average total cholesterol less than 5 yet have one of the highest levels of heart disease

Saturated fat, causes high cholesterol causes heart disease is which of greates cons of modern era.

I'm not acting the bollix, this is something I take very seriously. My own father suffered from heart disease

reilig

The World Health Organisation today published it revised recommendation of maximum sugar level intake per day. The new level is 25g or 6 spoons. This incorporates sugar from processed food and sugar from natural food including fruit and honey.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2014/consultation-sugar-guideline/en/

How much fruit would a person need to eat per day to reach this level?

3 cups of blackberries or strawberries.
1.5 apples
1.2 oranges
1 large banana
1.5 cups of pinapple
1 cup of grapes.

As mentioned earlier in this thread, new research is coming on board which suggests that 2 portions of fruit per day are more than adequate to supply the vitimins and antioxidants that the human body needs on a daily basis. Eating excess fruit makes your body work harder to process the fructose and it can lead to health problems in later life. If you like fruit, then it is recommended to eat lower sugar fruits like berries (Strawberry, blackberry, red currants and blueberries). Berries also contain the most antioxidants of any fruit which are essential to your body.

People should aim to get the carbs that their body needs from veg.

If you don't believe me, ask the WHO

Muckit

bbam wrote: »

It was discussed on Mat Cooper yesterday evening..

Was more talk about sugar levels in food this evening with representatives from WHO and food safety authority.

bbam

reilig wrote: »

The World Health Organisation today published it revised recommendation of maximum sugar level intake per day. The new level is 25g or 6 spoons. This incorporates sugar from processed food and sugar from natural food including fruit and honey.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2014/consultation-sugar-guideline/en/

How much fruit would a person need to eat per day to reach this level?

3 cups of blackberries or strawberries.
1.5 apples
1.2 oranges
1 large banana
1.5 cups of pinapple
1 cup of grapes.

As mentioned earlier in this thread, new research is coming on board which suggests that 2 portions of fruit per day are more than adequate to supply the vitimins and antioxidants that the human body needs on a daily basis. Eating excess fruit makes your body work harder to process the fructose and it can lead to health problems in later life. If you like fruit, then it is recommended to eat lower sugar fruits like berries (Strawberry, blackberry, red currants and blueberries). Berries also contain the most antioxidants of any fruit which are essential to your body.

People should aim to get the carbs that their body needs from veg.

If you don't believe me, ask the WHO

Now, Now Rellig...
Your selectively extracting portions of the paper to back up your own notion of restricting fruit intake..

I didn't spend long looking but did that list of fruit come directly from them as a warning or did you include that yourself to support your own notions??

Here is what they are saying:

The suggested limits on intake of sugars in the draft guideline apply to all monosaccharides (such as glucose, fructose) and disaccharides (such as sucrose or table sugar) that are added to food by the manufacturer, the cook or the consumer, as well as sugars that are naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit concentrates.

They are specifically referring to either sugar ADDED during manufacturing or present in processed from fruit juices and concentrates..

The sugar present in fruit acts differently as it is present with the fibre contained and thus your body acts differently towards it compared to processed fruit juices or sugars added to meals.. Different fruits will have differing responses but that's why a varied intake of fruit and vegetables is recommended..

I say again..
A varied high fruit and veg diet is very good and healthy for the general population. This is widely accepted by health professionals world wide. I said before that those with specific conditions and diseases of course need to be careful about every aspect of their diet..
But for the general population more is better as regards fruit and veg in their diet.

Muckit

Well anyone for some rat, shark, grasshoppers or ants?!?!

Article in country living. Supposed to be high protein and low sugar

Zillah

bbam wrote: »

The sugar present in fruit acts differently as it is present with the fibre contained and thus your body acts differently towards it compared to processed fruit juices or sugars added to meals.. Different fruits will have differing responses but that's why a varied intake of fruit and vegetables is recommended.

Eating fruit is good for you because it has lots of good things, which outweigh the fructose, which is bad for you. Fructose is fructose, it doesn't matter where it comes from, it hits your liver just the same and isn't good for it, whether it comes from fruit or Haribo.

bbam

Zillah wrote: »

Eating fruit is good for you because it has lots of good things, which outweigh the fructose, which is bad for you. Fructose is fructose, it doesn't matter where it comes from, it hits your liver just the same and isn't good for it, whether it comes from fruit or Haribo.

That's just twaddle.
The fact that it's being consumed along with fibre has a huge effect. Particularly for people with diabetes. It's a fact that your body needs sugar. Yes too much processed sugars is bad and so we've seen the WHO move to have the amount of added sugars in our diet reduced.
This is beyond crazy folks. A high fruit and veg intake is good.

Zillah

Your body doesn't need a single speck of sugar. Other carbs are broken down into glucose which is used to maintain blood sugar, you don't actually have to eat any sugar directly, and especially not fructose, which is bad for your liver.

Eating fruit is good for you, I'm just saying that the fructose in it is the same as in anything else. The only thing the fibre does is slow down the rate of absorption for the sugar, which is why its good for diabetics, it makes it easier to maintain their blood sugar level. It still gets to the liver eventually.

The bad effects of fruit sugar outweigh the good effects of the rest of the fruit if you eat tons of it. Eat a bit and you're best off.

But you're not arguing with me, you're arguing with the WHO so good luck with that.

bbam

I'm not arguing with the WHO, I think they have hit the nail on the head with reducing the added sugar in foods.

What I think is mad is the notion that people are propelling that fruit is somehow bad.

If people stopped shoving huge amounts of processed sugars, salt and fats into their gobs. And instead had a decent varied fruit and veg intake they would be better off. 5 portions should be the minimum people are consuming.

Zillah

Ok that's all fine. The fructose in fruit is the same as any other fructose though. It doesn't magically stop being bad for you because it is in fruit.

El_Dangeroso

reilig wrote: »

The World Health Organisation today published it revised recommendation of maximum sugar level intake per day. The new level is 25g or 6 spoons. This incorporates sugar from processed food and sugar from natural food including fruit and honey.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2014/consultation-sugar-guideline/en/

How much fruit would a person need to eat per day to reach this level?

3 cups of blackberries or strawberries.
1.5 apples
1.2 oranges
1 large banana
1.5 cups of pinapple
1 cup of grapes.

As mentioned earlier in this thread, new research is coming on board which suggests that 2 portions of fruit per day are more than adequate to supply the vitimins and antioxidants that the human body needs on a daily basis. Eating excess fruit makes your body work harder to process the fructose and it can lead to health problems in later life. If you like fruit, then it is recommended to eat lower sugar fruits like berries (Strawberry, blackberry, red currants and blueberries). Berries also contain the most antioxidants of any fruit which are essential to your body.

People should aim to get the carbs that their body needs from veg.

If you don't believe me, ask the WHO

This is a logical fallacy, an appeal to authority. If you can show me even one study that shows that eating fruit ad libitum does anything but sustain health, then I'll concede your point. But so far I have only seen clinical evidence of fruit being beneficial.

Damo810

Just catching the end of what seems like an interesting and appropriate programe on bbc, 'horizon: sugar vs fat'. Must see can it be watched online.

biddy2013

portion size is another thing if you weigh how much cereal you eat you will be very surprised. On the plan i am on 45g of cereal is a portion, it hardly covers the bottom of the bowl

reilig

Read it all. I explained to you that these weren't my notions but the view of a health professional who specialises in treating an illness upon which sugar has a major impact. I too explained that eating a balanced diet of fruit and veg was the best way to remain healthy but your grievance was when I disagreed with you idea that eating unlimited fruit was good for you. it's vital that people control their sugar intake and that of their children to prevent illness in later life.

bbam wrote: »

Now, Now Rellig...
Your selectively extracting portions of the paper to back up your own notion of restricting fruit intake..

I didn't spend long looking but did that list of fruit come directly from them as a warning or did you include that yourself to support your own notions??

Here is what they are saying:

The suggested limits on intake of sugars in the draft guideline apply to all monosaccharides (such as glucose, fructose) and disaccharides (such as sucrose or table sugar) that are added to food by the manufacturer, the cook or the consumer, as well as sugars that are naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit concentrates.

They are specifically referring to either sugar ADDED during manufacturing or present in processed from fruit juices and concentrates..

The sugar present in fruit acts differently as it is present with the fibre contained and thus your body acts differently towards it compared to processed fruit juices or sugars added to meals.. Different fruits will have differing responses but that's why a varied intake of fruit and vegetables is recommended..

I say again..
A varied high fruit and veg diet is very good and healthy for the general population. This is widely accepted by health professionals world wide. I said before that those with specific conditions and diseases of course need to be careful about every aspect of their diet..
But for the general population more is better as regards fruit and veg in their diet.

Muckit

I don't think anyone needs to read a survey to know that eating any food ad lib isn't good for you.

biddy2013

Muckit wrote: »

I don't think anyone needs to read a survey to know that eating any food ad lib isn't good for you.

was a woman at slimming world the other night said she ate 6 packs of tayto one after the other wtf

bbam

reilig wrote: »

Read it all. I explained to you that these weren't my notions but the view of a health professional who specialises in treating an illness upon which sugar has a major impact. I too explained that eating a balanced diet of fruit and veg was the best way to remain healthy but your grievance was when I disagreed with you idea that eating unlimited fruit was good for you. it's vital that people control their sugar intake and that of their children to prevent illness in later life.

I've agreed all along that people with diabetes need to be particular about the fruit/veg and all foods they eat.
But there is no evidence that imposing this diet on the rest of the population is appropriate.

Actually the opposite has been shown to be helpful. 5 or more portions is a healthy lifestyle.

Regarding the list of fruit portions you added to a WHO report on sugar. Well, it was bordering on disengonuous as the report was specifically talking about added sugar and processed fruit drinks but the post made the implication that list was the WHO recommendation.

This is common that in posts you see excerpts from different pieces of information joined crudely together and implying to all that it's fact.

The WHO report does in no way say to resteict fruit intake.
The HSE healthy information recommends 5 or more as do countless credable sources.

I've seen no credible information anywhere linking eating a varied high fruit and veg diet to people developing diabetes.

It is not widely believed within circles of dieticians.

reilig

Well you know what they say " Medical professionals differ and patients die".

The advice relayed to me was not diabetic specific. Being married to a dietician, you should know that the main role of a dietician is to keep people well and prevent illness as opposed to treating illness. So information that they give out, research and study that they do to further their knowledge on an ongoing basis is for to keep people healthy. Guidelines change and RDA's are constantly falling. I for one have encouraged my family to stick to the guidelines on fruit and sugar and it has been very beneficial for them and it is something that I intend to continue to do in the future!

At the end of the day I am responsible for my children's well being and if reducing the amount of sugar that they take in is beneficial to them, then that is what I will do!

bbam wrote: »

I've agreed all along that people with diabetes need to be particular about the fruit/veg and all foods they eat.
But there is no evidence that imposing this diet on the rest of the population is appropriate.

Actually the opposite has been shown to be helpful. 5 or more portions is a healthy lifestyle.

Regarding the list of fruit portions you added to a WHO report on sugar. Well, it was bordering on disengonuous as the report was specifically talking about added sugar and processed fruit drinks but the post made the implication that list was the WHO recommendation.

This is common that in posts you see excerpts from different pieces of information joined crudely together and implying to all that it's fact.

The WHO report does in no way say to resteict fruit intake.
The HSE healthy information recommends 5 or more as do countless credable sources.

I've seen no credible information anywhere linking eating a varied high fruit and veg diet to people developing diabetes.

It is not widely believed within circles of dieticians.

Muckit

There was a lad here that I know through work. He was getting married a few months back and was on this diet which included, l kid you not, eating 15 bananas for his breakfast!!!!!

bbam

reilig wrote: »

Well you know what they say " Medical professionals differ and patients die".

The advice relayed to me was not diabetic specific. Being married to a dietician, you should know that the main role of a dietician is to keep people well and prevent illness as opposed to treating illness. So information that they give out, research and study that they do to further their knowledge on an ongoing basis is for to keep people healthy. Guidelines change and RDA's are constantly falling. I for one have encouraged my family to stick to the guidelines on fruit and sugar and it has been very beneficial for them and it is something that I intend to continue to do in the future!

At the end of the day I am responsible for my children's well being and if reducing the amount of sugar that they take in is beneficial to them, then that is what I will do!

Obviously our positions on this point differ..
I respect your position and in general your postings are interesting and informative.

On this issue I find the overwhelming evidence both nationally and internationally to support the idea that more fruit and veg is better than less.
I've seen little or no credable evidence to the contrary.


http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/fruit/en/index2.html

My last post on this is from our friends in the WHO, they have a minimum recommendation on fruit/veg intake but no maximum, they report all the problems associated with LOW fruit and veg intake, they even go so far as to put a number 1.7million people die prematurely from too little fruit & veg intake. Absolutely nowhere is there a pointer towards a high fruit and veg intake being negative in any way..
And to clarify, I mean a minimum of 5 portions of fruit and veg, from varied sources, fresh as possible, frozen is fine. All as part of an overall varied diet of meat, carbs etc.. combined with appropriate exercise.. Obviously I wouldn't support sitting down and eating nothing but fruit & veg, that would be insane.

hugo29

Muckit wrote: »

There was a lad here that I know through work. He was getting married a few months back and was on this diet which included, l kid you not, eating 15 bananas for his breakfast!!!!!

was that banana man by any chance