Carbs, Trans Fats, Fatty Foods, Heart Disease - Wrong Again

  • Thread starter Danoff
  • 125 comments
  • 5,812 views
FoolKiller
That said, the AHA standards are meant more for people at risk of heart disease and/or stroke. They are also simplified. They suggest poultry and fish because that is much easier than explaining lean vs non-lean cuts of beef. They aren't meant for everyone. I can say this, I can buy Heart Check Certified ham.

Lunchmeat-Deli-Select-Premium-Honey-Ham-lower-sodium.jpg


They obviously aren't on some kind of anti-red meat campaign.
Click to expand...

To possibly be pedantic; the ingredients don't say what meat's in that? In the UK ham is most likely to be either pork or turkey, it's just a cut of meat. People presume pork (which the market exploits). Is that the same in the US?

Either way it's not a red meat when cooked... and therefore currently Good For You. Until science says otherwise, obviously.
 
Omnis
Hey, look: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-brown/theres-just-no-doubt-limi_b_5318585.html
Click to expand...
"Just no doubt." That's the least-scientific thing you can say. They should fund their own research to find a definitive answer if they are that sure but questions are now lingering.

TenEightyOne
To possibly be pedantic; the ingredients don't say what meat's in that? In the UK ham is most likely to be either pork or turkey, it's just a cut of meat. People presume pork (which the market exploits). Is that the same in the US?
Click to expand...
If it is turkey, then they make their turkey ham taste worse on purpose.

Either way it's not a red meat when cooked... and therefore currently Good For You. Until science says otherwise, obviously.
Click to expand...
From a dietary standpoint it is red meat. The "Other White Meat" idea was an advertising campaign started by Pork Producers of America.
 
Well, that's Nancy Brown, CEO of the AHA. Anyway, my post pretty much takes care of her argument. She is making a dangerous assumption. I fear taht neither party is absolutely correct in this case. I can say with certainly, at least, that if either party is, they do not know why.
 
Danoff
Now Gluten is on the chopping block.

http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/05/gluten_sensitivity_may_not_exist.html

Turns out, [sarcasm] I know this is a huge shock to everyone [/sarcasm], that unless you have an auto-immune disease, a recent study indicates that you can't be sensitive to gluten.

Are we sure of the science? No. Does this smell like absolutely 100% the correct answer? Yes.

Read the article for the use of the term "noceboeffect" if nothing else.
Click to expand...
However, gluten is very difficult to digest, in particular wheat gluten, it almost comes to the point to where you don't want it except on certain baked goods. Unless you are on a high fiber diet, it is better to avoid it anyways as it could lead to heart problems down the road.
 
Sanji Himura
...it is better to avoid it anyways as it could lead to heart problems down the road.
Click to expand...

Except that argument can be applied to pretty much anything.

"We don't understand, but you might not want to eat [INSERT FOOD HERE] because you might get [INSERT HEALTH PROBLEM HERE]."

If there's reasonable evidence that there's a causal link but it's not well understood, sure. If you're just hedging your bets, eat it and don't be a pussy.

People have been living good long lives well before all this nutrition stuff turned up. While doing the right thing may improve your life expectancy or quality of life, there's not much evidence to suggest that eating a "normal" diet is terrible for you.

People have been eating bread since the year dot. Anyone who was prone to horrible side effects from gluten consumption has probably been evolutionarily selected into oblivion by now.
 
As Adam Carolla likes to say: There are no food allergies in third world countries.

Now, he is just saying that when you are starving you suddenly don't have issues and any food is good.

The point he hits unintentionally is explained by the gluten researcher. We have no shortage of food. We have food in abundance in a million forms. We cannot live without problems. Our brains can't accept it (so The Matrix tells me). We create what the researcher calls nocebos.

In other words: most non-disease related food sensitivities are just first-world problems.
 
FoolKiller
If it is turkey, then they make their turkey ham taste worse on purpose.

From a dietary standpoint it is red meat. The "Other White Meat" idea was an advertising campaign started by Pork Producers of America.
Click to expand...

Hard to disagree with that :D I had a summer job working in a factory in the UK that produced chicken, turkey, pork and beef products. I've never touched the processed stuff again :\

I'd seen "the other white meat" campaign and I accept that it's "red meat" in a butchery context, but I think (in the UK at least, and I have no source) that more people consider it to be a white meat when cooked and considered as part of a diet.

Adam Carolla's statement about "no food allergies in 3rd World Countries" is simply rubbish. There are few surviving people with food allergies in the 3rd world, that's for sure. Otherwise the statement just seems to appeal to 1st world readers who'd say "haha, of course, it shows that food allergies are a 1st-world fad!". Er no, they're biological.

It's kind of like saying that Africans are somehow a different species... I can't help but infer that and it makes me a bit uncomfortable.

EDIT: Went to make some breakfast and had to come back and post some more! :D If it were true that there are no food allergies in the 3rd World then there wouldn't be a 3rd World... science would be all over the Perfect Human like a rash, to mismatch an analogy :)
 
Last edited:
Wow, is everyone using that gif now? Also, that doesn't even make sense. Do you have anything to add?
 
Not as a reference to your posting, but the actual article. Edited my post to make bold.

It seems ridiculous that the CEO of one of the pre-eminent authorities on heart disease has a headline containing that phrase.
 
Omnis
Yeah, the only people with legit gluten concerns are those with celiac disease and perhaps eczema.
Click to expand...

My sister claims extreme gluten sensitivity. As in, a bite of bread and she's sick for weeks. There's almost no chance that she's medically on solid ground. She doesn't have celiac either. I've asked a doctor who told me that for a small amount of food that you're allergic to you can have an acute reaction in the short term. But from a bite or two of a food an allergen shouldn't put you down for weeks. So I'm always on the lookout for ways to prove that my sister is making at least part of it up.

The other thing is that being apart from it doesn't lessen her sensitivity to it, which should also be the case for gluten.
 
KSaiyu
Not as a reference to your posting, but the actual article. Edited my post to make bold.

It seems ridiculous that the CEO of one of the pre-eminent authorities on heart disease has a headline containing that phrase.
Click to expand...

Because it's her job to give the best possible advice to the schmoest of the Joes. Without going into detail that would make the average basic's head explode, that is.
 
Danoff
My sister claims extreme gluten sensitivity. As in, a bite of bread and she's sick for weeks. There's almost no chance that she's medically on solid ground. She doesn't have celiac either. I've asked a doctor who told me that for a small amount of food that you're allergic to you can have an acute reaction in the short term. But from a bite or two of a food an allergen shouldn't put you down for weeks. So I'm always on the lookout for ways to prove that my sister is making at least part of it up.

The other thing is that being apart from it doesn't lessen her sensitivity to it, which should also be the case for gluten.
Click to expand...
Why not just buy some Seitan (she'll think it's the devil hehe) and make her eat it. Get an epipen
 
Danoff
My sister claims extreme gluten sensitivity. As in, a bite of bread and she's sick for weeks. There's almost no chance that she's medically on solid ground. She doesn't have celiac either. I've asked a doctor who told me that for a small amount of food that you're allergic to you can have an acute reaction in the short term. But from a bite or two of a food an allergen shouldn't put you down for weeks.
Click to expand...

This thread's gone from to "there are no food allergies in the 3rd World" to "you can't be gluten sensitive unless you have one of two specific conditions".

It isn't true; everyone's immune system reacts differently, even in members of the same family. Non-celiac gluten episodes can range in severity. I accept that the norm is much less severe than in celiacs but the extreme is not.
 
TenEightyOne
Adam Carolla's statement about "no food allergies in 3rd World Countries" is simply rubbish. There are few surviving people with food allergies in the 3rd world, that's for sure. Otherwise the statement just seems to appeal to 1st world readers who'd say "haha, of course, it shows that food allergies are a 1st-world fad!". Er no, they're biological.
Click to expand...
While his point is hyperbolic, from my perspective, and his, growing up lower or lower-middle class and then working your way up, you seem to find yourself going from little or no food allergies or sensitivities in poor neighborhoods to half the people you know "requiring" a special diet in well off neighborhoods. I had personally never heard of a person with a food allergy or sensitivity until I got to college.

But then, the US did have an 18% increase during my high school and college years.

It's kind of like saying that Africans are somehow a different species... I can't help but infer that and it makes me a bit uncomfortable.
Click to expand...
If Africa was the only place where third-world countries existed... Since it isn't, I understand you being uncomfortable by inferring that. If he means anyone, based on his local demographics, it is Mexicans, Asians, and Eastern Europeans.

EDIT: Went to make some breakfast and had to come back and post some more! :D If it were true that there are no food allergies in the 3rd World then there wouldn't be a 3rd World... science would be all over the Perfect Human like a rash, to mismatch an analogy :)
Click to expand...
Kind of like they are the countries without lactose intolerance, a scientifically understood food sensitivity based on genetics and demographic ancestry?

See, not so crazy to think certain groups don't suffer from certain sensitivities, because we know it does happen.
 
FoolKiller
Kind of like they are the countries without lactose intolerance, a scientifically understood food sensitivity based on genetics and demographic ancestry?

See, not so crazy to think certain groups don't suffer from certain sensitivities, because we know it does happen.
Click to expand...

I agree with much of what you say... but are you saying that there are countries whose residents are all naturally lactose tolerant?
 
1081, it can affect you, but it's most likely not going to kill you like an allergy can.

Am I lactose intolerant? No. Can I handle a lactose load supplied by four breakfast stouts without death farts and colonic bacterial overgrowth (diarrhea)? Not even with a lactase supplement, no. Although it does help tremendously.

scaled.DSCN0535.JPG


Everyone that claims to be gluten sensitive should eat a patty of the above. Pure wheat gluten. If you don't feel any worse than you do after some taco bell, then stop being such a nancy and enjoy your delicious gluten. HAIL SEITAN!
 
True, it's not going to be fatal unless you have some other immune condition that it exacerbates.

I have a friend who's gluten-intolerant but not celiac, her body goes into a kind of fever-fighting mode sometimes, elevated temperature, swollen glands, sweating, it can last four or five days. That can be from a small accidental consumption, other times she can accidentally eat more without any trouble. It's clearly not in her head but it's also presumably hard to 'calibrate'.

EDIT: And death farts can be the best bit although that seems to be a gender-dependent preference.
 
TenEightyOne
I have a friend who's gluten-intolerant but not celiac, her body goes into a kind of fever-fighting mode sometimes, elevated temperature, swollen glands, sweating, it can last four or five days. That can be from a small accidental consumption, other times she can accidentally eat more without any trouble. It's clearly not in her head but it's also presumably hard to 'calibrate'.
Click to expand...

Current research is suggesting that it is either in her head, or that it is some other uncontrolled factor. My money would be on the latter given that it's not well correlated with gluten consumption.
 
Danoff
Current research is suggesting that it is either in her head, or that it is some other uncontrolled factor. My money would be on the latter given that it's not well correlated with gluten consumption.
Click to expand...

That wouldn't be any research I'd seen, do you have a source? Gluten intolerance is very real, celiac and otherwise. link.
 
TenEightyOne
I'm not sure what that shows in support of your argument? He accepts that the condition exists, it satisfies the diagnostic criteria as linked, but his further research shows that gluten itself may not be the specific cause.

Thus far the diagnoses and treatments are the same even if the research is young, no?
Click to expand...
Considering the treatment to non-celiac gluten sensitivity is not eating gluten, and secretly giving them a gluten sensitive diet resulted in their symptoms worsening, no. When they didn't know they were following the treatment diet they claimed to feel worse.

I wish he had gone a step further, telling them that a high gluten diet was gluten free and seeing how that panned out.


But right now, we have the guy who discovered non-celiac gluten sensitivity, pointing out that he can't prove it exists with gluten as the only control factor.
 
FoolKiller
But right now, we have the guy who discovered non-celiac gluten sensitivity, pointing out that he can't prove it exists with gluten as the only control factor.
Click to expand...

Is this something new in the States? His research was 2011, he certainly didn't "discover gluten sensitivity". People have known about this for many years - I don't know how many but it's definitely more than 3 :)

My friend's problems first began over 30 years ago and were quickly diagnosed.
 
TenEightyOne
I'm not sure what that shows in support of your argument? He accepts that the condition exists, it satisfies the diagnostic criteria as linked, but his further research shows that gluten itself may not be the specific cause.

Thus far the diagnoses and treatments are the same even if the research is young, no?
Click to expand...

Danoff
Current research is suggesting that it is either in her head, or that it is some other uncontrolled factor. My money would be on the latter given that it's not well correlated with gluten consumption.
Click to expand...

Seems like it pretty much is exactly what I said.
 
Danoff
Seems like it pretty much is exactly what I said.
Click to expand...

No, he accepts that the condition is treated by removing gluten-based dietary items but goes on to say that further examination is required to see if the gluten is specifically the problem..

Is this a new thing in the States or something? You guys all seem genuinely at sea.

Gibson
"These data suggest that NCGS, as currently defined, might not be a discrete entity or that this entity might be confounded by FODMAP restriction, and that, at least in this highly selected cohort, gluten might be not be a specific trigger of functional gut symptoms once dietary FODMAPs are reduced."
Click to expand...

He doesn't quite say what the aggregators are saying he says.
 
Last edited:
There is a tremendous fad right now for blaming everything on gluten. Hungover from too much beer? Must be the gluten...
 

Latest Posts

Back