there's NO SCIENCE on low fat diets!!!! allegedly


[www.huffingtonpost.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2014 03:07PM by fresh.

I read it, its got me so confused, 80 10 10 , 98 dash 1 dash 1
20-40-40 !High fat, low fat, low carb, high protein, mediocre protein! Breast cancer numbers...Sleepwalking rates..all point to...fat is bad..mmkay

Thanks for posting this!

Dr. Campbell is a renowned vegan, and has done extensive research into his field. He is one among several vegan doctors and researchers who endorse a vegan diet that includes abundant grains and beans. Among his peers are Dr. Esselstyn, Dr. Greger, Dr. Barnard, Davis RD, Dr. Fuhrman and several others who often attend speaking engagements together.

The low fat (cooked) vegan diet has had incredible success in reducing diabetes and heart disease and helping to alleviate animal suffering. Dr. Barnard for example sponsors many research activities and has very successfully promoted the use animal simulators instead of the real thing for medical students.

These doctors and dietitians are my heros. I don't care if they don't eat exactly the way I eat. I have a very difficult time with grains and beans; but I wish to be vegan, so I stay raw vegan.

A 10% fat vegan diet that includes plenty of cooked grains and beans has a vastly different nutrient content than a 10% fat raw food diet.

My position is this: If a raw diet with a ratio of 80-10-10 or 90-5-5 works for a person consistently, then fine. If it doesn't work consistently, there may be a better option.

In my humble opinion, although I'm personally all raw, vegan is the priority.

>>A 10% fat vegan diet that includes plenty of cooked grains and beans has a vastly different nutrient content than a 10% fat raw food diet.


you seem to be saying that a 10% fat vegan cooked diet is Better, nutritionally , than a 10% raw vegan diet.

if yes, then why?

of course I am aware that it depends on the diet, but it seems that you are implying that.

Sorry fresh, I will clarify my view:

If a diet doesn't include grains and beans, missing nutrients from those foods can be replaced by nuts, seeds, and sprouts in sufficient quantities.

so without nuts, seeds and sprouts, a raw diet has missing nutrients?

Not exactly missing the nutrients, but missing sufficient quantity and balance of the nutrients.

This is my opinion, after experiencing the diet myself and after analyzing nutrient content of the meals included in Graham's 80-10-10. I don't have that book anymore so can't include references; but as I recall, none of the meals even reached 50% of calcium RDA, which is very low.

To me, this explains why the diet has been so difficult for people to maintain consistently.

Has it been easy for you to sustain consistently, over a long period of time?

well I certainly wouldn't want to argue with your opinion !

consider this if you wish,

IF you believe the RDA, then sure, that would lead you to believe in the calcium deficit, as well as other nutrients.

In fact, believing in the rda will lead you to consume things that have other negative aspects, as I have said, nuts and seeds and other things that cause dehydration and have many negative aspects and can cause muscle and nerve pain and fatigue in my experience.

many of these negatives won't be experienced unless one is active, which is why most of those who are active minimize fats and nuts/seeds.

I am not suggesting that people should not eat nuts/seeds if they wish to for reasons of their own. i have experienced the "craving" (if you don't mind that word) for avos and nuts and seeds so i know just what you're talking about but am happy now with just the occasional avo. nothing wrong with others thinking otherwise or doing otherwise.

merely providing another aspect here, because you have integrity, do not shy away from questions and are not threatened by others opinions, especially mine.

calcium rda is 1000mg

now here are the worldwide calcium intakes , 1989, from various areas, presumably without any indication of calcium issues.

896,836,565,751,850,368,477,484,305,432,344

the higher calcium intakes are associated with higher protein intakes, which presents a problem for calcium absorption.

make of the above what you wish. so the average is around 400, with the advantageous low protein, and 800 for the higher areas of the world.

i would say i was all raw vegan for a decade and then relaxed a bit and for the last decade about 99% raw 99% vegan.

as far as Easy - it has been relatively easy, but I would submit that there are a whole host of causative factors that impact the ease of maintaining strict diet for decades. some would say I have not been 100% therefore I have failed, and it has not therefore been easy. I could submit that those not eating water rich whole food are eating foods that have effects similar to cooked.

my days are not a struggle, put it that way, and no bad blood tests or deficiency symptoms and only the occasional b12 pill(s) every few years.

Thanks for your response. I'm very familiar with calcium intakes, but the meal plans in 80-10-10 were significantly lower as I recall (sorry, no more book).

Blood tests are a good idea. We should probably keep in mind though that serum calcium is not the best indicator of sufficient calcium intake, since the body normally removes calcium from the bones to maintain the serum calcium level.

As long as it's easy for you though and you are healthy and prefer to eat this way, I think that's fine. I think people should follow the (vegan) diet that works for them. I don't believe in dietary "failure". People's diets are their own evolutionary process. If a diet isn't working for them, it's time to move on. This doesn't have to mean move away, but just to find the necessary changes or additions. These can be large or small, a little here, a little there, one or two different days/week.

I would be concerned about your B12 intake if you're only taking a single pill or a few pills every few years; but of course, it's your choice.

If you don't mind my asking, do you follow a regular exercise routine?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2014 05:22PM by suncloud.

it depends on whether you are shooting for a particular calcium target.
are you shooting for 1000mg even though it is apparent that most do not get even near that around the world?

as far as I'm concerned I am getting 125% of what is required.
I do not put my faith in rda.

only 65% of the rda is necessary to satisfy most.

i just put in a simple diet of bananas figs and lettuce and got 500 mg for 2000 calorie example

that doesn't worry me at all. If that concerns you then I understand.

I have done/do all kinds of sports like weight lifting, biking tennis swimming hiking windsurfing surfing sailboating kayaking running walking unicycle frisbee football skating skiing waterskiing snowboarding

"I could submit that those not eating water rich whole food are eating foods that have effects similar to cooked."

Absolutely! I agree. Only I think the effects of cooked are both bad and good. Bad, just because personally, I don't feel good. Good, because cooked starches do have certain nutrients.

Beans and grains are seeds.

With raw nuts and seeds, I don't feel the bad effects (although I know I would if I ate too many). I only experience the good.

Consider that in Hawaii and other tropical islands, in my view it is not only unnatural, but anti-nature not to eat a coconut (huge, abundant, ancient food).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2014 05:41PM by suncloud.

"I have done/do all kinds of sports like weight lifting, biking tennis swimming hiking windsurfing surfing sailboating kayaking running walking unicycle frisbee football skating skiing waterskiing snowboarding"

Well, that's good, but I was wondering, do you follow a regular exercise routine?

suncloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I have done/do all kinds of sports like weight
> lifting, biking tennis swimming hiking windsurfing
> surfing sailboating kayaking running walking
> unicycle frisbee football skating skiing
> waterskiing snowboarding"
>
> Well, that's good, but I was wondering, do you
> follow a regular exercise routine?

sorry, I read your question wrong. too speedy with my reading.

although its all exercise to me I would say with respect to what is commonly considered exercise ---running, walking, biking and bodyweight and weightlifting resistance training. simple stuff, shoulder presses, ab work, pullups on a tree, pushups, squats

coconut - sure, I've got nothing against coconut but too much of the fat bothers me so I just drink the water for the most part.

You said you're in hawaii? what fruits/nuts do you pluck off the tree/vine and eat?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2014 07:36PM by fresh.

"You said you're in hawaii? what fruits/nuts do you pluck off the tree/vine and eat?"

Ho! avocado, lilikoi (passion fruit, pick up from ground - like Easter egg hunting), mango, guava, Ka'u Gold orange, Meyer lemon, rambutan, lychee, longan, mangostein, rose apple, star apple, mountain apple, jackfruit, mangostein, white sapote, mamey sapote (usually requires ripening after picking), sugarloaf (white) pineapple, apple banana, silk fig banana, jaboticaba, papaya, ohelo berries, poha berries. Oh, did I say mangostein? Probably more.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2014 08:21PM by suncloud.

wow. i'm getting on the next plane.

the mangosteens here are ridiculously hard after drying out during shipping

I want to go to Hawaii. My partner thinks its too dangerous to live there when the tidal waves comes.