Why is nutrition so controversial? Is the whole field really that divided?

Sup yall. Nutrition major here, getting my dietetics license in a year or so ("nutritionists" are the people who work at gnc or herbalife. dieticians have minimum of masters degree and work in hospital)

Basically, use common sense. Your body has evolved over millions of years to eat a certain way. When you deviate from this, your body enters a disease state. The most common reason for death around the world is diet related diseases. Even cancer and shit is caused by diet.

Tbh my quick guide would be

step 1: track your nutrition on cronometer

step 2:eat only whole foods. Nothing processed. Only water or juice or tea. Limit meats.

step 3: if you want to do even more, go vegan and do your research on nutritionfacts.org

tl;dr: if you want legit science thats not funded by any industry, check out nutritionfacts.org. its a nonprofit and run by an ex-professor of stanford

> sugar is sugar
fucking lel i knew this board was retarded. Learn some carbohydrate chemistry please

same person as Nah bro theres a difference between high fructose corn syrup (sugar) and something like agave nectar (sugar). the sugar in fruit is going to be better for you than sugar in your 32oz coke since its accompanied by fiber and other things. look up Monosaccharide vs disaccharides

because someone wants you to eat poison, op.

Your brain and all your cell walls need cholesterol and similar lipids.
Fat is healthy, so is protein. Avoid excessive carbs and avoid added sugars at all cost.
Drink lots of water or water-based drinks where you control the ingredients (coffee, tea)

You have to learn the biochemistry behind human metabolism to understand nutrition fully and not just take someone's word for it. There is no one optimal diet. Your goals will influence what diet is best. For instance, a bodybuilder will want to maximize protein intake, whereas someone who's aiming for longevity will aim for protein restriction, particularly of the amino acid methionine (restriction of which is associated with significantly improved outcomes) and upping the intake of glycine (which clears methionine via glycine N-methyltransferase). As a general rule though, a whole food diet is always a good first step.

Look up studies of iv feeding of long-term comatose patients for the most accurate data on nutritional requirements and deficiency-related diseases.

Hey user you seem knowledgeable, would you say this diet concept is legit since it has good historical outcomes? Or could it just be a coincidence and the people in these regions have good genes and it's just their culture that eats these things, so their longevity isn't caused by the diet?

Should I follow this?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Zone

The most important thing for dieting is to go to sleep at the same time every day. When you stay up, some chemical fuckery in the brain forces you to eat, and there is no way to resist it because you do not have free will.

>Okinawa (Japan)
This article isn't trustworthy because it includes statistics from at least one country that is notorious for social security fraud.

its trustworthy. Plant based diets are what humans evolved to eat. meats dont have vitamins or fiber

Well I don't think it is so easy analyse what happened in human body. Probably it isn't related only to lobbies but there is poor knowledge about it.

Is a high fiber diet good? I keep hearing it may or may not be positive and could be negative.

So to live longer i should restrict calories and eat less protein? I don’t give a shit about muscle, i just want to live long/not die in pain from health problems.

Is sugar from fruit juice then as bad as corn syrup since you're not actually eating the fiber?

if you extracted glucose from a fruit or from corn it's still glucose.

I used to work at a candy factory that uses a specific formulation of fruit puree (just sugar and water sourced from fruit juice concentrate), corn syrup, and raw sugar so they can tout "fruit is the first ingredient!" even though the product is 60% raw sugar, the rest being water and gelatin. They market it as something-like-fruit but it's the same shit as gummi bears. The food industry is truly the worst.

Does it take you more than 2 minutes to shit? You need more fiber and probably other things, too.

only plant foods have fiber. animal products have no fiber. 97% of Americans are deficient in fiber. people who only eat a plant based diet have 70% lower rates of colon cancer among other things. (colon cancer having a direct relationship with fiber). So yeah high fiber is good papi

Natural is good :) this video directly links to your topic, sources cited too
nutritionfacts.org/video/if-fructose-is-bad-what-about-fruit/

blended smoothies are generally going to be better than juicing because it keeps the fiber
nutritionfacts.org/video/juicing-removes-more-than-just-fiber/

But, with regards to just sugar

nutrition
applied biology
not math

Carbs like bread, rice, pasta, etc, even in "whole grain" form shoild not make up that much of your diet. Period.

Every single nutrition argument just boils down to people going "No, ACTUALLY-" with whatever nutritional factoid they've latched on to.

this is correct.

It really seems like the food one eats is a primordial in-group out-group thing.

Why?

>vegan

lmao, "nutrition major". Veganism objectively deprives your body of essential nutrients.

Define "processed" and explain why it is bad.

>that food pyramid
>dairy above fish, beans and nuts
what kinda bullshit is this?

all nutrients (except water, and b12 which comes from bacteria) come from plants. ANY nutrient you find in meat comes from plants or is synthesized by the animal from plants.

While yes, you can be deficient on a vegan diet, this is why I recommend you track your nutrition on a website like cronometer

"Dietary intake studies have shown that vegans, on average, are not getting the recommended daily intake of three nutrients: calcium, iodine, and vitamin B12. Using the same criteria. though, omnivores are deficient in seven nutrients: calcium, iodine, and five others. Still, the EPIC Study found this year that vegans not getting enough calcium have increased bone fracture risk. Those getting enough—600 milligrams a day—were fine."

But, if you want to look at actual data...
nutritionfacts.org/video/omnivore-vs-vegan-nutrient-deficiencies-2/

eat more plants.

same as youre body hasnt evolved over millions of years to eat fucking twinkies and soda. There are things that should be in your body, and things that shouldnt. Its up for everyone to decide for themselves. Id say start with removing pesticides (accumulate 35x higher in meat than in veggies), pollutants/antibiotics (something like 70% of antibiotics used on animals and seeps into the meat you eat) and fecal matter (on every piece of meat you eat) is a good start.

In my opinion. you can eat all that if you want.

samealso when you process foods you remove vital nutrients from the foods. Sometimes they try to "fortify" these foods by adding vitamins and minerals back in. This is usually ineffective because the minerals are not bioavailable.

>Dietary intake studies have shown that vegans, on average, are not getting the recommended daily intake of three nutrients: calcium, iodine, and vitamin B12. Using the same criteria. though, omnivores are deficient in seven nutrients: calcium, iodine, and five others.

This isn't a fair comparison. Most people on average eat shitty food. Obviously being vegan cuts out all of that stuff, but it's not healthier than eating vegetables along with some meat.

>youre body hasnt evolved over millions of years to eat fucking twinkies and soda.

Yeah, no shit.

But your body HAS evolved to eat (cooked) meat, that's why we have incisor teeth.

Yes, calorie restriction and methionine restriction are very beneficial for healthspan and lifespan. On calorie restriction in monkeys:

"The effects of CR on body composition and metabolic function were robust. Body weight was reduced in animals on CR compared to that of control animals, primarily due to a decrease in total body fat mass(11). The age-associated decline in muscle mass (sarcopenia) was also attenuated in animals exposed to CR(12). Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry analysis of lean muscle mass throughout the study revealed onset of sarcopenia at 15.5 years with statistically significant maintenance of lean muscle mass in the animals on CR compared to that of controls that has been sustained in animals at old age. Improvements in metabolic function conferred by CR, specifically insulin sensitivity, have been consistent and striking(9, 13). We found that improved glucose homeostasis was maintained and that diabetes was prevented by CR. Of the initial 38 control animals, 5 progressed to diabetes and an additional 11 were classed as pre-diabetic. In contrast, all animals on CR (even those with compromised metabolic function at baseline) show no impairment of glucose homeostasis (Fig. 3A). These data are consistent with CR providing long-term health benefits in protection against diabetes.

source: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2812811/

tl;dr: no monkey in the calorie restricted group had diabetes, significantly decreased risk of a common type of cancer in monkeys, and countintuitively protected against muscle wastage (sarcopenia) . There's actually more benefits but I'm not going to copy paste the entire article. Overall though, "Age-related diseases were detected in control animals at ~3 times the rate they were detected in animals on CR(Fig. 3B). Animals on CR, thus, appear to be biologically younger than the normally fed animals." So calorie restriction is probably worth it.

>all of that stuff

correction: *most of that stuff

Ok, name something that meat has that you cant get or synthesize in your body from plants. Ill assume the cancer from meat, the antibiotics, the cholesterol, the saturated fat are all left out.

Also, the longest living populations in the world eat extremely low amounts of meat.
Heres some sources talking about how the less animal products one eats, the longer the life expectancy:
nutritionfacts.org/video/do-flexitarians-live-longer/

Onto your second point, check out this pic and this paper which goes into more details:
adaptt.org/documents/Mills The Comparative Anatomy of Eating1.pdf

basically, the common consensus is that humans ate mostly plant based until the ice age, and then after that never gave up the bad habit of eating meat.

Your body doesnt need carbs

it needs the micronutrient from carb like foods such as kale, tamato, peppers

just eat fat like avocado, FISH (chicken turkey beef btfo), cheese, pretty much food that is high in both sat and unsaturated fat. Take your fish oil at 1200 mg

so eating less (including protein) actually prevents your muscle mass from deteriorating? I wonder if calorie restriction can maybe help the brain.

Not true. Brown rice is perfectly healthy and couple with legumes should be the foundation of any healthy diet.

Yes, calorie restriction also had a positive effect on gray matter conservation:

"Brain atrophy is a characteristic of human aging that is not accurately reproduced in smaller mammals(15). We therefore determined the regional effects of age, diet, and age x diet interactions on gray matter (GM) volume(16). There were several cortical regions (bilateral frontal and temporal cortex) where decreases in volume with age were observed independent of diet(Fig.4A–C) (17). However, animals subjected to CR had statistically significant preservation of GM volume in subcortical regions (Fig.4D–F) including the caudate and putamen and the left insula. Examination of group differences in the slope of age-related GM atrophy (age x diet group interaction) reveal regions where CR significantly modified the aging effect (Fig.4G–I) in the midcingulate cortex, lateral temporal cortex bilaterally, and right dorsolateral frontal lobe, indicating relative preservation of volume with age in the CR group. Thus, CR reduced age-associated brain atrophy in key regions that subserve motor function and aspects of executive function." from the same study.

Although I should note that ketogenic diets are more promising in terms of neuroprotectiveness (sci-hub.bz/10.1016/j.nurt.2008.05.004, tl;dr improved alzheimer's symptoms, the brain uses 70% ketones and 30% glucose when the body is in ketosis, vs 100% glucose otherwise.)

>Your body doesnt need carbs
Retard spotted

More for protein restriction:

Protein restriction without strong caloric restriction decreases mitochondrial oxygen radical production and oxidative DNA damage in rat liver (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15692733)

Low protein intake is associated with a major reduction in IGF-1, cancer, and overall mortality in the 65 and younger but not older population (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24606898)

Protein and amino acid restriction, aging and disease: from yeast to humans.(ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4254277/)

focus on the "whole food" part

because there are political and ideological implications, also could you imagine the backlash against food companies if they were honest about ZOG-chow and how awful it is for your endocrine system, nervous system, gut, bones, heart?
>pink slime, chicky nuggies, top-ramen which looks like foam, syrup flavored foods, fake cheese is akshually good for you haha
idiot

>vegan
You're thinking of vegetarianism. Veganism is a cult. Or do you want to explain how using furs is unhealthy? Or medicine tested on animals?

Vegetarians eat and drink animak produce like milk, cheese or honey, vegans don't. You are talking about retarded PETA niggers.

?
veganism means consuming not animal products. Vegetarians consume milk, eggs, cheese, and other dairy products.

Also considering that a majority of global warming is caused by the animal agriculture industry, id say its a good choice to stay away from harvesting the lives of other living beings for fun

there is a huge reason why ebt/foodstamps allow you to buy soda and sugary shit.

Is it to kill off undesirables or to milk them for money via medical/drug costs? Or is it simply another way that big industry has found a way to give itself tax dollars by using poor people as intermediaries?

>another way that big industry has found a way to give itself tax dollars
Probably this one.

Just show brit show on fat vs sugar and the conclusion was high fat diets with no carbs can fuck your memory and make you a brainlet. What is the most Veeky Forums approved diet just for pure brain performance that doesnt harm life span?

>Just show brit show
wat

Phone posting.

intermittent fasting vegan

Eat more good stuff and less bad stuff

What benefits will I accrew from actually persuing good nutrition over just counting calories. Currently now though, I'm not even dieting and am a bit in dissarray. My meals for today were:
>Dunkin Donuts' Ham, Cheese, Egg flatbread (480)
>DD tater tots (130)
>Cheetos Jalapenos (1440)
>Glazed minidonuts (420)
>energy drink (0)
then near the end of the day I was craving nutrients so I ate 2 bananas, an apple, and some nuts. And drank some water.

Besides getting fat, how is my diet negatively affecting me.

Because we know way less about the human body than we like to admit. So several different people come up with several different “optimal” diets and they all scream like retarded chimps about how their food intake chart is the best. The one that screams the loudest gets their food intake chart taught to other morons until we learn something new about diet/nutrition/humans that shows why the food intake chart we have been using is wrong. Then the cycle starts over again.

>posting a known pseud meme article as your "evidence"
Not a good look bro

Obesity actually does impact brain performance due to the increased usage of oxygen in sustaining your mass of fat, and increased blood pressure. If you're only a little bit fat it won't make a difference, but if you get to the point of morbidity it certainly will take effect.

nice ad hominem papi.

debate the argument

no pill masterrace

1990 = eat carbs
2010 = fug dont eat carbs

See

>your body has evolved over millions of years to eat a certain way.
>go vegan
The whole field of anthropology disagrees.

because nobody fucking knows anything about it

>humans have no hunting capacity besides using weapons
>humans developed over hundreds of millions of years before using weapons
>anytime humans eat meat they have to burn it over fire first, unlike any other omnivore/carnivore

if humans evolved to eat animal products, they wouldnt cause a disease state in the body.

nice bait papi

youll just get sick. each vitamin and mineral has a specific job. Lacking in one means the job doesnt get finished. this can appear in numerous different ways. for instance, deficiency in vitamin D can lead to osteoporosis and depression. Deficiency in some b vitamins lead to depression and low energy. Deficiency in vitamin k gives low blood coagulation, the list goes on.

Try filling out all your vitamin needs on a site like cronometer, see you how feel after a couple of days of hitting all your markers.

>not exclusively eating soylent
lmaoing @ ur toxins

Good soy boy goy. Keep it up! Proud of you!

t. The Jews

>not eating the soylent version without soy

Sources for the correlation between meat and cancer?

New soylent without “soy”!
* Now with twice the levels of plant estrogen.

>thinking plants have more estrogen in them then meat

Does anyone else feel like food guides should be made according to necessary nutrients rather than fucking whatever?
It blows my mind to this day that pasta and crackers are on an official food pyramid, AND that they made up the base of it for a long time
Even putting the fats/sugars at the top makes no fucking sense. Why wouldn’t an avocado go in the fats? Why would grassfed butter and coconut oil?

If you’re going to make a pyramid of food groups, it should ONLY be separated by vital needs. A protein section, fats section, nutrients/vitamins section, and carbohydrate section arranged as a fucking pie chart with needed percentages.
Why is it arranged by something so trivial as made up categories? It makes it seem like you NEED to be eating something in every rung. Do I see fucking juice on there? The fuck is that? Don’t drink tucking juice. God fucking dammit we need to make a new chart in this thread right fucking now or everyone is going to get fucking diabetes

hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2015/11/03/report-says-eating-processed-meat-is-carcinogenic-understanding-the-findings/

the world health organization,

and watch this video
nutritionfacts.org/video/how-not-to-die-from-cancer/

>nutritionfacts.org/video/how-not-to-die-from-cancer/
>Shows graph with max 20% reduction, shows image with 95% reduction.
Holy shit did you close your eyes when they spoon-fed you this shit.

So are multivitamins bullshit or what?

I agree with you about everything.

Pasta and milk is just on there because "we got lots of this shit". It's not that it's bad, but hardly necessary.

>THE GRAPH IS THE WRONG SIZE

wtf are you talking about, rebuke the studies or dont reply to my shit

i can tell the meat has already deteriorated your brain

Shush, OP, or the Jew lobbyists will come after you.

>The video willfully misrepresents the facts and paints an inaccurate picture and then finishes on wild speculation.

I bet you believe spinach makes you strong and carrots make you see better.

link the time in the video to back up your claim

or just check out the multiple peer reviewed journals cited, where the video gets the graphs from. Are you saying you're smarter than both the world health organization and top nutrition researchers?

1:20 for the graph and then the two circular inset images accompanying images as it goes along.

o dam youre right, i have no clue bro

Listen you twits
I said we should make a new pyramind (pie chart)
Is anyone going to do this with me
We still need to decide on the necessary catagories (proteins, fats, etc.)

Pyramids and Pies are too controversial shapes for this because the pyramids were for storing grain and pies are already a food group. /sarcasm

If you really want to do it right you need to make one of these where one axis is how much of a group you should eat and the other is caloric density.

keto, dunno what bullshit brit show you saw but when you look at actual research it has been shown to improve memory and brain function in many people

yeah if you have epilepsy and want your body to burn out at 35

curious about what causes this "burning out" and what exactly you mean by that? Not being facetious btw. I don't know if you mean zero carb but most keto diets allow around 25g of carbs from vegetables.. and your brain uses the BHB instead of glucose just fine. Is it the autophagy? because that's mostly only if you combine keto with fastomg, and even then it's not some magical fast forward that will cause you to age or die faster really.

oops fasting* not fastomg