<p>I try to avoid processed food because they typically have the worst sugars, the worst carbs, the worst fats, the worst protein, and no fiber. Not to say that you can eat healthy processed foods (or even fast food restaurant foods), it’s just easier to stick to real foods.</p>
<p>silverturtle, you are getting an F in biochemistry from me. Where is your analysis of the issue? Does a rat study translate into human results well? As my colleagues discovered over and over, is easy to cure a rat from cancer Is glycemic index the most important measure, and what happens long-term? These are just a couple of questions right of the bat, but there are plenty others.</p>
<p>Your Q about strawberries: do you know the complete chemical composition of a strawberry? That’s a Nobel prize Q.</p>
<p>Too bad that dietary scientists spend more time performing research sponsored by food conglomerates instead of reading organic chemistry and biochemistry books. :)</p>
<p>I agree: Nearly all questions remain unanswered. The participants in the study that obsoleted the glycemic index may have a thing or two to say about being deemed rats.</p>
<p>Actually, peanut oil would be the last oil on the list I generally cook with. But, of all the options for sauteeing when I need a largely flavor free oil, peanut oil is better than highly processed vegetable or canola oils.</p>
<p>I basically use butter, olive oil, and lard/bacon fat for almost all of my cooking.</p>
<p>“The participants in the study that obsoleted the glycemic index may have a thing or two to say about being deemed rats.”</p>
<p>Nope… The rats were used in the first link; these were guinea pigs.</p>
<p>My advice: if you want to be listened to as a nutritionist, study STEM subjects, especially biochem and orgo. Debate and philosophy will not help to propel your career in this direction. Of course, they would be helpful to a future a lobbyist for the processed food industry. :)</p>
<p>3.38 miles. The tricky thing was finishing as the sun was going down. I had a choice of short-sleeve dri-fit and thin, quarter-zip dri-fit. I chose the quarter-zip and it was definitely the right choice. This paired with shorts. I thought about track pants but they weren’t needed. It was a nice, casual run - no dog issues (that’s not to say no dogs), but the flies and mosquitoes are out. I think that I have a bite on my leg. I was a bit pressed for time so I didn’t make 10 for the day but 9.38 is respectable.</p>
<p>So morning stretch video, upper abs, obliques and lizard stretches and that should do it for the day. I have an early morning tomorrow and hopefully a run outside in 70 degree (short-sleeve) weather.</p>
<p>Yet it seems all one needs to take a crack at the multifarious dietary doctrines is basic scientific skepticism. And I have demonstrated nowhere near the bloated confidence requisite for the lobbying of anything.</p>
<p>7.5 miles on the bike, 2 miles walking. Over 80 degrees today for both activities. Such is life. Magnolia trees starting to flower with their dinner plate sized blossoms.</p>
<p>Nice increase in mileage Deborah T!</p>
<p>And for whatever it’s worth, I’m sticking with the real food because it tastes better–IMO. Plus, when you’re feeding a somebody or two with known heart disease, who wants to quibble or even take the risk of eating crud? I’ll stick with the whole wheat (homemade) toast and fresh berries. Common sense and moderation seem imperative here. Favorite fat, without a doubt, olive oil.</p>
<p>How could I forget duck fat? Whenever I cook duck, I save the fat and put it in the freezer. Great tasting stuff for sauteeing!</p>
<hr>
<p>On salt intake:</p>
<p>Here’s a 2006 study published in the American Journal of Medicine that used the NHANES database (huge federal CDD population study) to look at coronary disease deaths and all-cause deaths after 13 years. They used an obvious cut-off point: those who ate less than the government recommended 2300 mg of salt per day and those who ate more than the government recommended 2300 mg. In their statistical analysis, they controlled for obesity, smoking, etc.</p>
<p>They found that people who ate less than the recommended 2300 mg of salt were 37% more likely to have died from coronary vascular disease than those who ate more salt. Those who ate less salt were 28% more likely to have died from all causes. These kinds of population studies are horribly flawed, but they really are all we have to go on for questions of these sorts.</p>
<p>Is it better to eat more salt or less salt? I have no idea. I sure don’t see a strong concensus in the scientific studies to justify the government giving me a precise number. At this point, I’m so skeptical of government nutrition guidelines that my baseline assumption is that, if the government issues a nutrition guideline, I probably should do just the opposite.</p>
<p>That’s not a very good state of affairs, but it’s hard to come to any other conclusion when they are so consistently wrong and when the guidelines are so heavily influenced by vested interests and the panels are so stacked.</p>
<p>Me too. I’m a fan of Michael Pollan’s Food Rules. Shopping the perimeter of the supermarket. Avoiding the ends of the aisles. Real food that our great-grandparents would recognize as food is basically what I’ve been eating and physically I feel so much better. </p>
<p>Rest day today, class with sabadog which was pretty active. Gorgeous weather; I was almost tempted to run but I need a rest day.</p>
Where is your analysis of the issue? Does a rat study translate into human results well? As my colleagues discovered over and over, is easy to cure a rat from cancer