I always find it striking how slim the actors look in 1970s - early 1980s television series. They don’t even look as though they achieved slimness through hard work at a gym. Many were eating so-called ‘balanced diets’ which included white bread and potatoes. There were ‘balanced’ meals available for lunch in many a canteen too, and at school. Children mostly ate these meals, cooked on the premises, rather than packed lunches. I don’t have much faith in the idea of re-formulating UPF as I don’t think that it will be improved unless we all expect better quality, and the trouble is that we don’t.
"Avoid products with more than five ingredients" is an underspecified, in my opinion. "Spices" is barely an ingredient at all, even though it can make or break any recipe/product formulation.
Great observations and discussion, and bringing it all home with Michael Pollan is spot on. Going to focus even more on following these tenets. I pack my daughter’s lunches, and I know I’m doing a better job than most (even as I stuff some bars in there) as her friends make fun of her healthy lunches. Some of the parental capitulation to kids’ addiction to UPFs is so disheartening and undermines community in some ways. My kid is the “freak” who eats apples and hummus and actual cheese.
And thank you for calling out Fredrick Stare and his evil cohort at Harvard. His (and his university’s) cynical use of the media to tout his soda and breakfast cereal patrons while attacking the nascent natural foods movement should not be forgotten. The damage they did to public health is now multi-generational.
I don't hammer on less meat. The evidence that the average American should reduce meat or saturated fat is lacking. Perhaps when the average Sat Fat consumption was 18% that made sense but at current 10% most have already cut back considerably and won't benefit from further reduction.
The 4 core randomized controlled trials the AHA used to support its 2017 declaration that we should all lower saturated fat intake were small, weird, fatally flawed studies.
If I go for a longer walk locally in the UK, across the park or along the river, obesity basically does not exist.
In all the times I've done it, which is a lot, and I mean a LOT, the number of obese people I've seen is 4 or 5. Which is still heartening in a way, as it shows it's possible for those in that situation.
Sure weight can be lost through diet without exercising in some cases, but it's still markedly inferior.
A skeptical take may be that research tends to only find answers that justify the $$$$ going into it.
I think it's clear by now that GLP 1-RA and SGLT-2 inhibitors are going to solve all our obesity problems, along with metabolic syndrome, prevent Alzheimer's disease, decrease antidepressant usage, and solve the problems of the Middle East. They sure have done a job on the food company stocks in my portfolio.
I read Hall's article not long after it was published, and more recently read Van Tulleken's excellent and surprisingly entertaining book, so you're preaching to the choir. The latter makes clear that changing the UPF environment will not be easy for a variety of reasons, and until significant changes are made, many people will continue to get a large portion of their diet from UPF, due to food addiction, and/or food deserts with mainly only UPF available, and/or the inability to pay the higher prices for unprocessed foods. (I was surprised to read in Van Tulleken's book that UPF is the cheapest food, and he does a good job of explaining why). Some folks wonder if foods can be engineered to be more healthy and less addictive, and I think this should be explored. I think we also need to study sweeteners like allulose and stevia to see if they are more helpful or harmful, because I'm not sure how realistic it is to tell people to give up all sweets except fruit. I'm also wondering what you meant by "the misleading health claims of low fat diary." If overconsumption of calories is a problem, isn't it better to eat low or nonfat dairy? I'm not talking about suger-loaded yogurt, but rather plain nonfat yogurt, and nonfat or low fat cheeses. You're saying those are unhealthy? It's hard enough for older folks to get enough protein as it is, and taking those off the table will make it even harder. What about the studies showing the health benefits of whey protein? Hope to hear more about these issues in your future posts! :)
Nina Teicholz wrote (Substack?) that we should refer to Junk Food because it is colloquial — does not contain scientific-sounding words and everybody knows what it means roughly. That way, we would not continue to discuss what it is about something for which there is no definition that causes harm although we don’t know which harm. Most of all, skeptics (curmudgeons ?) would not have to keep restraining themselves from arguing with people who they otherwise think are doing useful scientific work.
There's much discussion regarding nutrient density, processed foods, and food as medicine these days. But what if the global obesity epidemic is a nutrient toxicity problem? That said, these web searches bring up narratives that suggest nutrient toxicity is what caused the global increase in obesity and diabetes.
Annadie Krygsman The Importance of
The importance of a balanced ω-6 to ω-3 ratio
Anna Haug Individual Variation
poultry consumption and human cardiometabolic health
Great information here as usual: here are some of the guidelines I use. As a starting point, I use the word "field": 'foods exactly as they grow up out of the ground and in the field'. Translated: unprocessed grains-vegetables-beans-fruit-nuts-seeds (GVBfns) at the 80+% level which correlates with only 4 of our 32 teeth for tearing meat and the remainder of our biology being essentially vegan. The huge EPIC study showed that animal protein intake correlated with breast and prostate cancer as well as lymphomas. Pre-technological societies are 80% gathers (organic unprocessed whole foods = GVBfns)/10-20% hunters and no matter how long they live have no high blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol, cancer of the breast-uterus-prostate-colon-pancreas, diverticulitis, constipation, ... . Fermented foods are recommended and essentially, following these guidelines 80+%, "anything once in a while" = usually a few times per month or year. You might enjoy the relevant published article "The Unhappening of Heart Disease" that discusses all of this in further detail. HRS, MD, FACC
I always find it striking how slim the actors look in 1970s - early 1980s television series. They don’t even look as though they achieved slimness through hard work at a gym. Many were eating so-called ‘balanced diets’ which included white bread and potatoes. There were ‘balanced’ meals available for lunch in many a canteen too, and at school. Children mostly ate these meals, cooked on the premises, rather than packed lunches. I don’t have much faith in the idea of re-formulating UPF as I don’t think that it will be improved unless we all expect better quality, and the trouble is that we don’t.
I would agree
"Avoid products with more than five ingredients" is an underspecified, in my opinion. "Spices" is barely an ingredient at all, even though it can make or break any recipe/product formulation.
Ok, how many of us had to look up "ad libitum"?
Great observations and discussion, and bringing it all home with Michael Pollan is spot on. Going to focus even more on following these tenets. I pack my daughter’s lunches, and I know I’m doing a better job than most (even as I stuff some bars in there) as her friends make fun of her healthy lunches. Some of the parental capitulation to kids’ addiction to UPFs is so disheartening and undermines community in some ways. My kid is the “freak” who eats apples and hummus and actual cheese.
And thank you for calling out Fredrick Stare and his evil cohort at Harvard. His (and his university’s) cynical use of the media to tout his soda and breakfast cereal patrons while attacking the nascent natural foods movement should not be forgotten. The damage they did to public health is now multi-generational.
I don't hammer on less meat. The evidence that the average American should reduce meat or saturated fat is lacking. Perhaps when the average Sat Fat consumption was 18% that made sense but at current 10% most have already cut back considerably and won't benefit from further reduction.
The 4 core randomized controlled trials the AHA used to support its 2017 declaration that we should all lower saturated fat intake were small, weird, fatally flawed studies.
Red meat helps us meet protein goals.
This is my observation:
If I go for a longer walk locally in the UK, across the park or along the river, obesity basically does not exist.
In all the times I've done it, which is a lot, and I mean a LOT, the number of obese people I've seen is 4 or 5. Which is still heartening in a way, as it shows it's possible for those in that situation.
Sure weight can be lost through diet without exercising in some cases, but it's still markedly inferior.
A skeptical take may be that research tends to only find answers that justify the $$$$ going into it.
Seems like a straight-forward question but actually quite complicated.
It would be nice if PCPs were initiating for this indication.
Most cardiologists have little familiarity with their use.
Until FDA approved and Pharma reps descend on MDs there will be slow uptake. And insurance likely will not cover.
I think it's clear by now that GLP 1-RA and SGLT-2 inhibitors are going to solve all our obesity problems, along with metabolic syndrome, prevent Alzheimer's disease, decrease antidepressant usage, and solve the problems of the Middle East. They sure have done a job on the food company stocks in my portfolio.
I read Hall's article not long after it was published, and more recently read Van Tulleken's excellent and surprisingly entertaining book, so you're preaching to the choir. The latter makes clear that changing the UPF environment will not be easy for a variety of reasons, and until significant changes are made, many people will continue to get a large portion of their diet from UPF, due to food addiction, and/or food deserts with mainly only UPF available, and/or the inability to pay the higher prices for unprocessed foods. (I was surprised to read in Van Tulleken's book that UPF is the cheapest food, and he does a good job of explaining why). Some folks wonder if foods can be engineered to be more healthy and less addictive, and I think this should be explored. I think we also need to study sweeteners like allulose and stevia to see if they are more helpful or harmful, because I'm not sure how realistic it is to tell people to give up all sweets except fruit. I'm also wondering what you meant by "the misleading health claims of low fat diary." If overconsumption of calories is a problem, isn't it better to eat low or nonfat dairy? I'm not talking about suger-loaded yogurt, but rather plain nonfat yogurt, and nonfat or low fat cheeses. You're saying those are unhealthy? It's hard enough for older folks to get enough protein as it is, and taking those off the table will make it even harder. What about the studies showing the health benefits of whey protein? Hope to hear more about these issues in your future posts! :)
Nina Teicholz wrote (Substack?) that we should refer to Junk Food because it is colloquial — does not contain scientific-sounding words and everybody knows what it means roughly. That way, we would not continue to discuss what it is about something for which there is no definition that causes harm although we don’t know which harm. Most of all, skeptics (curmudgeons ?) would not have to keep restraining themselves from arguing with people who they otherwise think are doing useful scientific work.
There's much discussion regarding nutrient density, processed foods, and food as medicine these days. But what if the global obesity epidemic is a nutrient toxicity problem? That said, these web searches bring up narratives that suggest nutrient toxicity is what caused the global increase in obesity and diabetes.
Annadie Krygsman The Importance of
The importance of a balanced ω-6 to ω-3 ratio
Anna Haug Individual Variation
poultry consumption and human cardiometabolic health
Dietary arachidonic acid as a risk factor 2016
This is terrific, and I love being reminded of Pollan’s food rules. Real food is so much better! I look forward to your future posts on this.
Great information here as usual: here are some of the guidelines I use. As a starting point, I use the word "field": 'foods exactly as they grow up out of the ground and in the field'. Translated: unprocessed grains-vegetables-beans-fruit-nuts-seeds (GVBfns) at the 80+% level which correlates with only 4 of our 32 teeth for tearing meat and the remainder of our biology being essentially vegan. The huge EPIC study showed that animal protein intake correlated with breast and prostate cancer as well as lymphomas. Pre-technological societies are 80% gathers (organic unprocessed whole foods = GVBfns)/10-20% hunters and no matter how long they live have no high blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol, cancer of the breast-uterus-prostate-colon-pancreas, diverticulitis, constipation, ... . Fermented foods are recommended and essentially, following these guidelines 80+%, "anything once in a while" = usually a few times per month or year. You might enjoy the relevant published article "The Unhappening of Heart Disease" that discusses all of this in further detail. HRS, MD, FACC
What about Huel and Jimmy Joy?