Proteinaholic by Dr Garth Davis

[FluffyChix 17,415]

1 hour ago, Newme17 said:

https://www.budgetbytes.com/2010/01/roasted-poblano-and-sweet-potato-salad/

https://www.budgetbytes.com/2014/01/kale-tortellini-cranberry-salad/

Also, do ya'll think we should utilize a vegan/vegetarian thread for recipes only? Or here is okay? Is there one? I haven't checked.

These look delicious!

[_Kate_ 2,224]

Just ordered this book and looking forward to reading it 🙂

[Newme17 3,444]

1 hour ago, _Kate_ said:

Just ordered this book and looking forward to reading it 🙂

It's amazing Kate. I'm looking forward to hearing your take on it!

[Newme17 3,444]

I was curious to who this Michael Pollan is that says "Eat food. Not Too Much. Mostly Plants" that I see some of you have on your signatures. So, it was fascinating to read about essentially picking apart foods; just as Dr Garth Davis mentions in Proteinaholic. I don't eat by "proteins" anymore, nor any other macro or micro nutrients. It's amazing how the western diet has adopted this way of eating (myself was included) and now after being "awakened" per se, it just seems weird to label my foods. "I'm going to eat such and such Protein today." -vs- "I'm going to eat some quinoa with black Beans and salsa today." (Or whatever foods you eat). This is what happens when foods are/have been picked apart:

Eat Foods, Not Nutrients

Pollan says that where we've gone wrong is by focusing on the invisible nutrients in foods instead of on foods themselves. He calls this "nutritionism" -- an ideology that's lost track of the science on which it was based.

It's good for scientists to look at why carrots are good for us, and to explore the possible benefits of, say, substance X found in a carrot.

What happens next is well-meaning experts tell us we should eat more foods with substance X. But the next thing you know, the food industry is selling us a food enriched with substance X. We may not know whether substance X, when not in a carrot, is good or bad for us. And we may be so impressed with the new substance-X-filled product that we buy it and eat it -- even though it may have unhealthy ingredients, such as high-fructose corn Syrup and salt.

I've got to add the myths:

Pollan identifies four myths behind this kind of thinking:

• Myth #1: Food is a delivery vehicle for nutrients. What really matters isn't broccoli but its Fiber and antioxidants. If we get that right, we get our diet right. Foods kind of get in the way.
• Myth #2: We need experts to tell us how to eat. Nutrients are invisible and mysterious. "It is a little like religion," Pollan said. "If a powerful entity is invisible, you need a priesthood to mediate your relation with food."
• Myth #3: The whole point of eating is to maintain and promote bodily health. "You are either improving or ruining your health when you eat -- that is a very American idea," Pollan says. "But there are many other reasons to eat food: pleasure, social community, identity, and ritual. Health is not the only thing going on on our plates."
• Myth #4: There are evil foods and good foods. "At any given time there is an evil nutrient we try to drive like Satan from the food supply -- first it was saturated fats, then it was trans fat," Pollan says. "Then there is the evil nutrient's doppelganger, the blessed nutrient. If we get enough of that we, will be healthy and maybe live forever. It's funny through history how the good and bad guys keep changing."

http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/news/20090323/7-rules-for-eating#1

Edited September 20, 2017 by Newme17

[Berry78 4,261]

Sure, all those myth debunking statements SOUND nice.. but how do we actually put any of it into practice?

We are so fortunate that we live in an era/area in which people can expect to live 70+ years. Grocery stores are FULL of foods of every sort.

Before about 1910, people only lived about half as long, and food availability was spotty, at best. We ate what was available, when available, and were happy for it.

Only in times if abundance do we stop to ask, "what SHOULD I eat?" With only 100 years of science actively asking this question, it's no wonder we haven't gotten it all figured out yet.

People get impatient with the process ("but they keep changing their story! First cholesterol is bad, now it doesn't matter!" etc.) But no one seems to realize that scientists are working with brand new data, trying to sort through it, and with additional new data coming in all the time, of course the picture always changes.

Pollan is recommending to cut off the science from dinner decisions, and that's fair. Let the scientists do their thing while you eat what YOU want to eat.

I do disagree that we needn't count or pay attention. Our food sources are the furthest thing from "natural" as one can get. Doesn't matter that much if you are eating an artificial-sugar laden Protein Bar or a modern cut of corn-fed beef or skim milk or ear of sweet corn. Everything we eat has been highly modified from what it would have been 1000 years ago.

And, don't forget, even if we did eat the same way as our ancestors.. they only lived for 40 years. Maybe that wasn't such a great time either!

Human beings are wonderfully adaptive. We can eat almost anything and do quite well... as a species. Individually, we do see lots of instances of malnutrition pop up.

Personally I've been short on vit. A and D. Others on this board are short on Protein and Iron. My MIL is short on Vit. D and Iron. My hubby has low vit. D and low HDL cholesterol.

In fact, I'd love to hear from anyone inside or outside the bariatric community that has had all their levels tested and weren't short on anything, and didn't take supplements. THOSE are the people whose diets we should all follow! Lol!

(Doctors don't test healthy people for most Vitamins, so that individual might be hard to find).

[Apple1 2,572]

I have just finished Michael Pollans book The Omnivore's Dilemma. It was a very good look at the different food industries in this country. It wasn't very scientific, but more about his journey to see where his food was coming from. He visited a food lot in Kanas where beef cattle are fed a steady diet of corn and rendered animal parts while standing knee deep in their own waste.

It was more of a philosophical journey he was taking and his trying to decide if he could morally continue to eat meat. I enjoyed the book and it opened my eyes to the many ways that the SAD has turned into a diet of mostly corn products. Those who still eat a lot of processed foods and supermarket meats are basically eating a bunch of processed corn. It is no wonder this country has such high rates of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

[Apple1 2,572]

2 hours ago, Newme17 said:

I was curious to who this Michael Pollan is that says "Eat food. Not Too Much. Mostly Plants" that I see some of you have on your signatures. So, it was fascinating to read about essentially picking apart foods; just as Dr Garth Davis mentions in Proteinaholic. I don't eat by "proteins" anymore, nor any other macro or micro nutrients. It's amazing how the western diet has adopted this way of eating (myself was included) and now after being "awakened" per se, it just seems weird to label my foods. "I'm going to eat such and such Protein today." -vs- "I'm going to eat some quinoa with black Beans and salsa today." (Or whatever foods you eat). This is what happens when foods are/have been picked apart:

Eat Foods, Not Nutrients

Pollan says that where we've gone wrong is by focusing on the invisible nutrients in foods instead of on foods themselves. He calls this "nutritionism" -- an ideology that's lost track of the science on which it was based.

It's good for scientists to look at why carrots are good for us, and to explore the possible benefits of, say, substance X found in a carrot.

What happens next is well-meaning experts tell us we should eat more foods with substance X. But the next thing you know, the food industry is selling us a food enriched with substance X. We may not know whether substance X, when not in a carrot, is good or bad for us. And we may be so impressed with the new substance-X-filled product that we buy it and eat it -- even though it may have unhealthy ingredients, such as high-fructose corn Syrup and salt.

I've got to add the myths:

Pollan identifies four myths behind this kind of thinking:

• Myth #1: Food is a delivery vehicle for nutrients. What really matters isn't broccoli but its Fiber and antioxidants. If we get that right, we get our diet right. Foods kind of get in the way.
• Myth #2: We need experts to tell us how to eat. Nutrients are invisible and mysterious. "It is a little like religion," Pollan said. "If a powerful entity is invisible, you need a priesthood to mediate your relation with food."
• Myth #3: The whole point of eating is to maintain and promote bodily health. "You are either improving or ruining your health when you eat -- that is a very American idea," Pollan says. "But there are many other reasons to eat food: pleasure, social community, identity, and ritual. Health is not the only thing going on on our plates."
• Myth #4: There are evil foods and good foods. "At any given time there is an evil nutrient we try to drive like Satan from the food supply -- first it was saturated fats, then it was trans fat," Pollan says. "Then there is the evil nutrient's doppelganger, the blessed nutrient. If we get enough of that we, will be healthy and maybe live forever. It's funny through history how the good and bad guys keep changing."

http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/news/20090323/7-rules-for-eating#1

This is such truth. I spent so much time worrying about my Macro percentages I had started choosing foods based on this alone.

Homestly I think if we just eat a varied diet of whole unprocessed food mostly plants we will hit most if not all of our needed nutrients. If you are going to include a small amount of meat make sure it is grass fed pastured and both humanly and sustainably raised.

I will still take some supplements because with a small stomach they will likely still be needed in some quantity. I will let my blood work determine that.

[Apple1 2,572]

1 hour ago, Berry78 said:

Sure, all those myth debunking statements SOUND nice.. but how do we actually put any of it into practice?

How about by just eating whole unprocessed foods for 80-90% of your diet? That would be a good place to start.

[Apple1 2,572]

My next book to listen to will be The Starch Solution by John A. McDougall. After that I will probably listen to The cheese Trap by Dr. Neal D. Barnard. I am really enjoying listening to books on my commute. I have a long list that I would eventually like to get to.

[Newme17 3,444]

8 hours ago, Berry78 said:

In fact, I'd love to hear from anyone inside or outside the bariatric community that has had all their levels tested and weren't short on anything, and didn't take supplements. THOSE are the people whose diets we should all follow! Lol!

This takes me to the Blue Zones, these people have longer life spans and way better diets than the western ones. I'm sure we can learn a lot from what they do lifestyle wise...which is where I'm going.

I don't recall where, but in Proteinaholic, Dr Davis says that all he takes is a B12 supplement. He does his lab work quite regularly from what I've read/heard. Same goes for Dr Greger, just b12.

[Apple1 2,572]

4 minutes ago, Newme17 said:

This takes me to the Blue Zones, these people have longer life spans and way better diets than the western ones. I'm sure we can learn a lot from what they do lifestyle wise...which is where I'm going.

This is a very important point. We need to look at the lifestyles of these people as a whole. They were active, had important family ties, traditions and community. I know it would be hard to live a completely stress free life, but we need better ways of dealing with it. Exercise and or physical labor serves us well in keeping us fit in both mind and body!

[Berry78 4,261]

44 minutes ago, Newme17 said:

This takes me to the Blue Zones, these people have longer life spans and way better diets than the western ones...

Dr Davis says that all he takes is a B12 supplement.

THIS is a huge thing for me. The concept that WFPB peeps need to take supplements at all. All those blue zone people lived before Vitamins had become available in pill-form (I think). They, by necessity, had to get every single one of their nutrients from diet.

Whatever diet I decide to follow, must, in principle, be able to provide everything a human needs without artificial supplementation. Now, I, personally, as a bariatric patient, will have to rely on vitamins for life because I can't eat the quantity of foods required to meet those needs, but as long as the diet could, in theory, uphold that mantra.. then it is an appropriate diet for the human creature.

[Newme17 3,444]

7 minutes ago, Berry78 said:

THIS is a huge thing for me. The concept that WFPB peeps need to take supplements at all. All those blue zone people lived before Vitamins had become available in pill-form (I think). They, by necessity, had to get every single one of their nutrients from diet.

The only reason we have to take B12 is due to not farming our own produce. B12 only comes from the ground. Hence, animals eat from it. Our produce filled grocery stores do not have the untouched farm to table quality fruits and veggies. So, in the old days, most people farmed their own produce or bought from the farmer's markets.

If I could ever get to the point of farming most of my own veggies and fruits, I won't need to have the supplement either.

[Apple1 2,572]

11 hours ago, Berry78 said:

Whatever diet I decide to follow, must, in principle, be able to provide everything a human needs without artificial supplementation.

I agree. This would be the best standard for which to judge a diet in a perfect world. If our stomachs were normal sized we would only need to supplement B12 if we strictly followed the WFPB and eliminated all animal products from our diets. If you were opposed to taking supplements, you could choose to eat a tiny amount of meat which is what many of the longest lived cultures did, save the vegan Adventists.

The health benefits are only one reason to eliminate meat from your diet. The way in which the animals are raised and treated are another, along with other ethical arguments against eating them. This is a very personal judgement. If I were to continue to eat meat I would seek out a local farm from which to purchase it where I could be sure the animals were raised and slaughtered humanely. However, the environmental reasons to stop eating animal products are something we as a society can not afford to ignore. I won't go into all of it here because it would take a whole book, but anyone that is interested can seek out the many books and documentaries available on this subject.

Once you start investigating the food industry you begin to realize how much you really took for granted.

[Berry78 4,261]

I guess I'm fortunate in where I live. If I chose to, I could purchase a yearling calf directly from a farm where it had free run in a large pasture, and send it to the butcher. I did do that once, and got so much meat it took 5 years to eat it all! Lol.

Ok, so the idea of eating gritty carrots.. not so much. But even if I thought that sounded like a good idea, I didn't see any studies that showed exactly how much B12 you can actually absorb by doing so. Have any of you seen where this was tested?

But, wild fish and seafood have a ton of b12 in them, and our bodies do store excess for long term use. I'm willing to bet that this is where most indiginous cultures received this nutrient. All people had to live near Water, so eating aquatic creatures would be a no-brainer.

Ever see "naked and afraid?" The survivalists tend to get most of their animal type foods from the water. It's just easier! They do eat as many plant foods as possible as well, of course.