Thx for the link Q.

Was an interesting watch. Seems obvious that a high carb, predominantly grain based diet is no good for most people. The whole debunking of the low fat diets made sense as well.

Like most documentaries, there were some things said that made me think oversimplification or personal bias, but that goes with the territory.

I think that the main problem with trying to study diet is that we are all different. We require different things, and even from day to day our needs change.

The diet of an Eskimo would be totally inappropriate for a Bushman. If you sweat a lot, you need to replace certain electrolytes etc. etc.

Some people are deficient in certain vitamins or minerals, and need to build back up to optimal levels. This doesn't mean that they should continue to load up once they reach optimal levels.

Why we feel the need to create a one-size fits all nutrition scheme beats me. Best thing is to pay attention to your body and learn its signals. Drink plenty of clean water, and give the body what it needs on a day to day, hour to hour basis.

Paleo diets might be good for many people, but cavemen didn't live to 120 either.

There's a few things about fast food, though, that one should question because no amount of diet will mitigate.

Ingredients: lots of fast food contains disgusting non-food ingredients, like industrial anti-foaming agents. This is not good! This never happened anywhere in evolution!

Factory farming: lots of animals are literally fed waste products, non-food items (concrete, woodchips, and worse), and OTHER DEAD ANIMALS. You can exercise, be skinny, and still get a brain full of prions. Sure, I want to look great, but I want my mind intact, too.

If you feel great hunting wild meat or sourcing local/free-range/antibiotic-free meat and it makes you happy, then more power to you. If a vegetarian diet makes you miserable, don't do it! But there are some very serious issues with factory farming that nothing can help, save abstinence. When humans first starting eating meat, it was still very congruent with the circle of life. Factory farming is an abject horror that will destroy your health and is destroying the planet.

Oh, yes, so there is an ecological impact, too.

Glad you liked that. One other documentary that I would recommend if anyone feels like it is Zeitgeist: Moving forward.
(Not to be pre-judged based on the first, with is ..... not so good)

If you don't want to watch it there is one thing that REALLY REALLY needs to spread that is mentioned in it.

There is the whole arguement about organic vs GM agriculture and that Organic can only feel 4 billion people MAX with the amount of available landspace.
NOT TRUE.

I am AGAINST buying organic and paying tons more for no more healthy food, highly inneficient use of farmland. Use of non-common more-toxic pesticides because the mainstream ones are banned and all the terrible things about it.

GM is not good either.

THERE IS A COMPROMISE. Organic can feed the world! 6, 7, 10 billion, not an issue.

Hydroponics and Aeroponics growing not only can use much less space to produce large yields of healthy organic food.
More importantly without the need for soil, these farms can be 2, 3, you name the number or STORIES HIGh.

ORGANIC HYDROPONIC/AEROPONIC SKYSCRAPERS CAN SAVE THE WORLD

I agree about the organic idea you have Q21,
But after watching the video, especially the last 30 minutes or so I am thoroughly unimpressed. He uses bad evidence, like Eisenhower having a heart attack despite having low cholesterol. He forgot to mention Eisenhower was a 4 pack a day smoker, and was known to eat a diet that today we would consider extremely unhealthy, with lots of red meats and high carbohydrates.
I agree that there isn't a link between dietary cholesterol and heart disease, especially since dietary cholesterol hasn't been linked to cholesterol levels in the blood. Eggs are a good example of this, very healthy but they were feared in the 80s because of their cholesterol levels. Today we know eating one egg a day(whole, not just white) is very good for you, it has high levels of protein, low calories and fat, but high cholesterol. Yet eggs are one of the healthiest breakfast food you can eat, aside from fruit.
However the same does not go for saturated fats. After a quick review on the literature, objective not just picking and choosing sources like this guy does. I found that studies have shown replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated leads to lower risk of heart disease, heart attack and death. I also found that monounsaturated fats have not been conclusively proven to have the same effect. More research needs to be done in that area.

Basically the reason people object to these types of claims is they fly in the face of what is known and accepted by scientific researchers. Ignore this guys obvious anti-government bias and you will still see that he doesn't go into much detail on his "evidence" and mostly uses physician interviews with physicians who are trying to sell a book or promote a new idea.
The truth is most doctors would disagree, most scientists would disagree, and in fact the basis of all nutrition, including the world renowned Mayo diet, is not based on low fat. But replacing saturated with unsaturated and cutting calories, while limiting fat overall. Even though switching fats has a small effect (14% reduction of having a cardiovascular event), this is still substantial and anyone who is already at risk can benefit from this.
Do you really want to be responsible for giving bad info to someone? I certainly wouldn't tell a person who just had a heart attack to continue consuming high levels of fats, especially saturated. Not because I have some agenda, but because that is the opposite of what the research shows. Sure there are studies which don't show this, but they are the minority. I would rather take the odds and put my health on the line and trust what I have heard from numerous sources, including doctors and nutritionists I personally know and hard data from many studies, showing the same effects, with different experimental designs.

That's great. I was just starting to re-watch it and take notes on the specific bits I think should be looked into further (which you seem to have already started)

I'd really like to get some links for the sources on the studies you mention so I can read them and they can likely shift my mind away from the TOTALLY REFUTED state the movie left it in.

Absolutely, I was unconvinced before I saw this. Its an excellent page discussing the controversy. Pay particular attention to the first section with a table comparing several studies. The second section is also important because it discusses a review of the literature conducted by an independent researcher. These sources have just been compiled on wikipedia, every individual study can be read in the sources section at the bottom.
Wikipedia-Saturated fat and Cardiovascuar Disease Controversy
I'm not passing everything in this article as fact since it is on wikipedia, but the sources are real. Also this is only about saturated fats, it doesn't discuss everything that was in the film, and some data as expected doesn't match. This was just one particular thing that stuck out at me.
"The evidence against saturated fat may not be as strong as dietary guidelines have interpreted [it is clear] that PUFAs (especially) and MUFAs are healthy fats", and that while there is room for saturated fats within the diet but "[they] should not be viewed as good for you". That was the overall finding of the American Dietetic Association panel, although they didn't agree on everything, that was their consensus.

dmtk2852, thank for this ! I've just bought a can of coconut oil :S But now I looked at it and it's all saturated fat so I threw it away.

People that perform hard intense exercise need some saturated fats in their diet. The message here is moderation. The real killer is the trans saturated fats. They have no use in a diet, and are very toxic.

...>>Governments and nutritionists keep on pumping out confusing stuff. One minute carbs are bad, next carbs are great. It's all a game they play to keep them in a job by confusing you into getting fat, so they can "help" you get thin again....All a game!

--Whatever happened to common sense??, do slim healthy people have degrees in nutrition..?.> NO!!, They simply keep active and eat in moderation. It aint "rocket science", folks...

--Regular exercise and a healthy balanced varied diet, with correctly portioned, spaced meals is the way fit and healthy people live. It's quite simple. Even Shaolin might get it?? ....

Fast food tastes like shit.

@proto I know I just ate a BK sandwich while waiting in the airport(I usually don't but I needed something quick), and now I'm quickly beginning to regret it.

@Christian Good points, I think saturated fats shouldn't be avoided completely, and in fact the studies I posted were just replacing some of the fats, not completely removing SFA(saturate fatty acid) or lowering fat content total.
That said, I still would avoid eating more than the recommended(I think 20g a day?). Trans fats are far worse, and it was the discovery that SFA were unehalthy that lead to trans fat being made from hydrogenated oils(margarine). It's far worse, and you shouldn't eat any of that if you can avoid it. The best bets are canola and olive oil IMO. Though there are many other health choices such as soybean oil. The best is to get a mix of PUFA and MUFA if possible.

@Shaolin, no problem. Coconut oil isn't great and in fact its recommended to not consume large amounts due to the SFA content. However as I posted, there is room for SFA in a healthy diet, just don't overdo it. Its better to replace as many SFA as you can with unsaturated fats. I've listed some healthy oil choices in my above reply to christian. My favorite is olive oil, very tasty rich flavor.

coconut contain medium chain fatty acids and they(the ones in coconuts) are not known at all to block arteries.. I eat alot of young coconut-but not coconut oil..and I have looked into this alot and never found anything that actaully links coconut consumption to any of the problems surroudning the consumption of other saturated and trans fats other than speculation based of studies done of saturated fats in general. in fact..everything I have read about the consumtion of coconuts only leads to positive outcomes. I am extremely skeptical of the issue surrounding coconut fat and negative health consequences.

"The difference is in the fat molecule. All fats and oils are composed of molecules called fatty acids. There are two methods of classifying fatty acids. The first you are probably familiar with, is based on saturation. You have saturated fats, monounsaturated fats, and polyunsaturated fats. Another system of classification is based on molecular size or length of the carbon chain within each fatty acid. Fatty acids consist of long chains of carbon atoms with hydrogen atoms attached. In this system you have short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), medium-chain fatty acids (MCFA), and long-chain fatty acids (LCFA). Coconut oil is composed predominately of medium-chain fatty acids (MCFA), also known as medium-chain triglycerides (MCT).

The vast majority of fats and oils in our diets, whether they are saturated or unsaturated or come from animals or plants, are composed of long-chain fatty acids (LCFA). Some 98 to 100% of all the fatty acids you consume are LCFA.

The size of the fatty acid is extremely important. Why? Because our bodies respond to and metabolize each fatty acid differently depending on its size. So the physiological effects of MCFA in coconut oil are distinctly different from those of LCFA more commonly found in our foods. The saturated fatty acids in coconut oil are predominately medium-chain fatty acids. Both the saturated and unsaturated fat found in meat, milk, eggs, and plants (including most all vegetable oils) are composed of LCFA.

MCFA are very different from LCFA. They do not have a negative effect on cholesterol and help to protect against heart disease. MCFA help to lower the risk of both atherosclerosis and heart disease. It is primarily due to the MCFA in coconut oil that makes it so special and so beneficial."

http://www.coconutresearchcenter.org/

There is a difference between long chain saturated fats found in many other products like meat etc and the medium chain ones found in coconuts..

Apparently the only study done on coconut oils that came to the conclusion they were unhealthy was done 4 decades ago, and used HYDROGENATED coconut oil...

I'm doing the Atkins diet thing.
I've lost about 20 pounds in the past 6-7 weeks.
Just cutting out most all carbs is a HUGE factor toward weight loss.

I agree to a large extent with what you have posted. You are right about the medium-chain tryglycerides, in addition I found that the composition of coconut oil SFA is not as bad as other SFA such as hydrogenated vegetable oil. Coconut oil is certainly better than hydrogenated oils and even butter since coconut oil does contain SOME unsaturated fats.
I still would limit intake though, not saying to avoid it completely, just that there are healthier options out there. Also coconut fruit is of course good for you, don't avoid that. As Christian said moderation is key, particularly with saturated fats.

@banshee these diets do work for some people, since your body enter a special state when carbs are limited. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone though, and personally I consume a lot of carbs(especially whole grains) as they contain dietary fiber. Whole grains have also been shown to be heart healthy, the recommendation is to make half of your total grains consumed, whole-grain.

to be fair..I would not eat coconut oil daily becasue it is not a whole food, other than if I make some sort of raw dish that calls for it..which is not often. Young coconuts contain less of the saturated fats than older ones and those are the ones I eat anyway becasue they taste better and are softer..in general I prefer whole foods to extracted oils etc..so yueah I agree wth you about moderation.

In terms of fats in general..I often eat 5 or 6 avacados a day, along with 1 coconut and loads of really sweat fruit. If I consumed that many fats from other sources like dairy products, fatty meats or fast food etc, along with that many carbs from sugary processed foods I am sure I would have diabetes.

Carb counting makes NO sense if you eat real food. I cant say this enough times...I have people telling me I dont get protein etc and all this other stuff..and that I eat wayy tooo many carbs..that I will get protein def and fat from carbs lol..you can count carbs all yuo want and eat low carb-but I feel that is VERY DANGEROUS. It should be recognised since this thread is focused to an extent on limiting carbs, that there is NO medical term at all for what people call "protein deficiency". The term does not even exist..beyond that there is zero evidence of ANYONE developing protein deficiency unless they literally are starving themselves by not eating anything. Anyone can look this up, there is just not even a medical definiton becasue it DOES NOT EXIST..

On the other hand there is a well defined term for carbohydrate deficiency..becasue we do NEED carbs..I really feel that worrying about and counting carbs is a backwards approach to health..If you are reducing how healthy your diet is to ammounts of carbs/fats etc than you dont really have a grasp of what healthy means imo. The source of your nutrients is just as important as the nutrients themselves..again, noone seems to have any problems with being fat from consuming tons and tons of carbs if they come from fruits instead of soft drinks and fast/processed junk food. I dont see fat people that eat fruits and vegetables..I see fat people that eat fast food, red meats, oily processed foots, drink soda and eat candy and chips.

Good point, low carb is not a great option because, as you pointed out, many carbs are good for you and required for your body. I think there needs to be a clear distinction made between complex carbs and simple carbs. The sugar in soft drinks and white bread are good examples of the simple sugars that run through your body and give you very little real energy. Complex carbs though such as those in fruits and whole grains are very beneficial.
The real issue I'm seeing on this thread are simple breakdowns of diet, IE low fat, low carb. The truth is there are good carbs and good fats, one needs to incorporate all of these elements in a balanced diet and live a healthy active lifestyle to truly be healthy.
I have learned the hard way that simple diets like Atkins are usually fad diets which may help you lose weight, but at cost of your overall health. The only diet I can truly recommend 100% is the Mayo clinic diet. This is one that is given to those patients about to undergo heart surgey who need to lose weight and improve their heart health. I have attached a link.
Mayo clinic diet
Fractal, I'm sure even you would agree with this one, the two major components are fruits and vegetables, above meat or carbohydrates.

Lol i love how he stands outside of Mcdonalds to see if any one would force him to go inside to eat Mcdonalds. Bc People blame fast food on their obesity.

I really had to come in and mention my friend, because fruitarianism comes up so seldom in conversation in my world.

There's a guy I've known for a very long time, a good friend, who was a fruitarian for years. He isn't now; but he is unquestionably the healthiest person I know. He is almost never sick, very strong, great disposition.

And the thing is, he had a birthday recently. I asked him which birthday it was; he looks like he's in his mid forties but I knew he had to be in his fifties.

He said it was his sixtieth birthday. Wow.

I also know a woman who participated in a longitudinal study at a major hospital on the effect of extremely-low-fat diets on womens' health. She followed stringent dietary requirements for TEN YEARS. Salad dressing by the teaspoon. Ground turkey in place of beef. No butter ever, ever. (Gah, she thought margarine was healthier anyway!) In her particular case it was just the most joyless kind of eating I've ever seen; but that was largely to do with her nature itself. And she was very smug the whole time, sure that she was right.

So, they wrapped up the study, and took a year or two to crunch the numbers, and then they announced:

No significant benefit. The extremely low levels of fat apparently caused people problems with joint mobility as well.

I don't eat breakfast cereal too often; but when I do eat shredded wheat, I probably shouldn't do it with half-and-half. On the whole though, I think the most important thing is whether you are enjoying your food, really enjoying it. I mean, the color, the flavor, your perception of its nourishing capacity, stuff like that. The creative flair of the cook. There was even a study back in the eighties that found that people absorb more nutrition from food they enjoy. (Heh heh, it was funny, as I recall they found people with a distinctive kind of cuisine, and tried feeding them the opposite.)

I found that especially rediculous in one sense..the guy is taking thing out of context in order to make a point. I really dont think anyone actaully thinks that mcdonalds staff is going to force someone to eat a hamburger..but growing up in a society with fast food on every damn corner, with brainwave entraining fast food/junk food commercials targeted directly at children, it is not hard to realize what people really mean when they say such things. Why the guy making the film cant understand I dont know..perhaps he is socially retarted and cant grasp the meaning of context?

It's like saying that people who blame the system for being faulty because they are in jail for smoking cannabis can only blame themselves becasue noone MADE them smoke cannabis.

If you took that quote and just applied the logic to all other situations it sounds equally as mute..like people who believe that drugs are bad and drug users need to be locked up due to DARE programs in school, or kids that grow up eating candy and drinking pepsi becasue it was given to them all they're life, not to mention soda machines in high school hallways. I even remember going to the dentist as a kid and them giving out lollypops and them GIVING ME MCDONALDS GIFT CERTIFICATES..it doesnt get any more programmy than that..

I mean..come on the whole issue is alot deeper than that. If the guy thinks social programming and brainwashing are not important points to take into concideration here than I dont think he is able to grasp the situation to it's fullest extent.

Fast food is to blame for alot of illness IMO. Obesity is one of those illnesses. I think anyone willing to refute that is partly delusional and trying to justify some poor dietary habits they have. With all the trans fats in fast food eating that stuff is like heart attack city-reguardless of how overweight someone is..I dont know why the focus is on obesity really either..just becasue you are not super fat does not mean you are healthy, not at risk for cancer, not at risk for diabetes or heart attacks etc...but eating fast food really is not going to up your chances of being a healthy person and not developing chronic ailments and diseases.

I am half beginning to wonder if that documentary was not in part sponsored by fast food companies..it's just another level of programming imo and it saddens me that people buy into this crap.

If I eat a lot of much processed food I get sick and feel bad and lethargic all the time. Then anxious and depressed.