Low carb scaremongering
Discussion
I had my sister today telling me that it had been on the news that low carb diets were unhealthy.
So I googled it, and found it was all about this;
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jan/...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827426
But it's sod all to do with low carb, and all to do with low fibre. And you can get plenty of fibre with much lower carb intake from vegetables than you can from grains.
otolith said:
I had my sister today telling me that it had been on the news that low carb diets were unhealthy.
So I googled it, and found it was all about this;
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jan/...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827426
But it's sod all to do with low carb, and all to do with low fibre. And you can get plenty of fibre with much lower carb intake from vegetables than you can from grains.
Meh. You can find scare stories on pretty much anything without needing to look very far. Atkins/low-carb/keto diets/lifestyles have had so-called health experts working themselves up into lathers for donkeys years claiming that the fat will clog up all your arteries within 2 seconds and you'll be dead from multiple heart attacks before you've reached the age of 20. It's all a load of nonsense. Clearly they've got bored of no-one listening to them about keto/low-carb diets and now they're banging on about high fibre ones instead. Yawn!So I googled it, and found it was all about this;
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jan/...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827426
But it's sod all to do with low carb, and all to do with low fibre. And you can get plenty of fibre with much lower carb intake from vegetables than you can from grains.
So you've had a quiet word with your sister about paying a bit more attention to news items before spouting b
ks and reminded her that "health correspondent" is journo code for the laziest person in any organisation with the lowest ability to interpret data and the highest at creating sensationalist bullst from scant information they don't understand, have you?
ks and reminded her that "health correspondent" is journo code for the laziest person in any organisation with the lowest ability to interpret data and the highest at creating sensationalist bullst from scant information they don't understand, have you?
Your sister is a little slow.
There was a big media push last August on the back of an article in the Lancet Public Health. It wasn't really very convincing, e.g.
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/08/low-carb-diets-...
but refutations, like real science, don't get reported at all. In fact, low carb has been proven to be perfectly healthy.
More recently, as you've spotted, fibre is the reason you are supposed to eat what you are told. The science behind that is pretty poor too - many people with digestive problems like Crohn's, Diverticulitis, and many others, find they clear up if they stop eating fibre. Certainly I wouldn't be aiming to eat more of it.
The big vegan push at the moment is the same. It's all backed by the food industry and aimed to make you eat whatever is most profitable. Normally wheat and sugar based.
There was a big media push last August on the back of an article in the Lancet Public Health. It wasn't really very convincing, e.g.
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/08/low-carb-diets-...
but refutations, like real science, don't get reported at all. In fact, low carb has been proven to be perfectly healthy.
More recently, as you've spotted, fibre is the reason you are supposed to eat what you are told. The science behind that is pretty poor too - many people with digestive problems like Crohn's, Diverticulitis, and many others, find they clear up if they stop eating fibre. Certainly I wouldn't be aiming to eat more of it.
The big vegan push at the moment is the same. It's all backed by the food industry and aimed to make you eat whatever is most profitable. Normally wheat and sugar based.
grumbledoak said:
Your sister is a little slow.
There was a big media push last August on the back of an article in the Lancet Public Health. It wasn't really very convincing, e.g.
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/08/low-carb-diets-...
but refutations, like real science, don't get reported at all. In fact, low carb has been proven to be perfectly healthy.
More recently, as you've spotted, fibre is the reason you are supposed to eat what you are told. The science behind that is pretty poor too - many people with digestive problems like Crohn's, Diverticulitis, and many others, find they clear up if they stop eating fibre. Certainly I wouldn't be aiming to eat more of it.
The big vegan push at the moment is the same. It's all backed by the food industry and aimed to make you eat whatever is most profitable. Normally wheat and sugar based.
You appear to be just as slow. I highly doubt thew OP's sister has any knowledge of any guff being spouted last August, she's just caught headlines and articles on news media presented in a typically misleading fashion. I haven't sen any of this wheat and sugar promotion linked to "the big vegan push" either. Where's that from?There was a big media push last August on the back of an article in the Lancet Public Health. It wasn't really very convincing, e.g.
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/08/low-carb-diets-...
but refutations, like real science, don't get reported at all. In fact, low carb has been proven to be perfectly healthy.
More recently, as you've spotted, fibre is the reason you are supposed to eat what you are told. The science behind that is pretty poor too - many people with digestive problems like Crohn's, Diverticulitis, and many others, find they clear up if they stop eating fibre. Certainly I wouldn't be aiming to eat more of it.
The big vegan push at the moment is the same. It's all backed by the food industry and aimed to make you eat whatever is most profitable. Normally wheat and sugar based.
otolith said:
I had my sister today telling me that it had been on the news that low carb diets were unhealthy.
So I googled it, and found it was all about this;
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jan/...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827426
But it's sod all to do with low carb, and all to do with low fibre. And you can get plenty of fibre with much lower carb intake from vegetables than you can from grains.
That Guardian article is shockingly bad, The BBC one less so as it doesn't say low carb is bad as such and at least mentions you can get fibre from fruit and veg.So I googled it, and found it was all about this;
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jan/...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827426
But it's sod all to do with low carb, and all to do with low fibre. And you can get plenty of fibre with much lower carb intake from vegetables than you can from grains.
mooseracer said:
That Guardian article is shockingly bad, The BBC one less so as it doesn't say low carb is bad as such and at least mentions you can get fibre from fruit and veg.
It does mention it at the bottom, but yes, less strident than the Guardian. BBC said:
But there is concern people are turning their back on fibre, with the popularity of low-carb diets.
Prof Nita Forouhi, from the University of Cambridge, says: "We need to take serious note of this study.
"Its findings do imply that, though increasingly popular in the community at large, any dietary regimes that recommend very low-carbohydrate diets should consider the opportunity cost of missing out on fibre from whole-grains.
"This research confirms that fibre and whole-grain intakes are clearly important for longer term health."
Prof Nita Forouhi, from the University of Cambridge, says: "We need to take serious note of this study.
"Its findings do imply that, though increasingly popular in the community at large, any dietary regimes that recommend very low-carbohydrate diets should consider the opportunity cost of missing out on fibre from whole-grains.
"This research confirms that fibre and whole-grain intakes are clearly important for longer term health."
It's sad that this dogma is perpetuated by presumably educated people and 'scientists'. Simply repeat the same thing over and again and eventually it becomes accepted and pretty much unquestioned.
"Population epidemiological studies and feeding studies" do not prove anything. They may show a relationship between factors, but nothing causative. There are no peer reviewed random control trials to substantiate these wild claims, yet the media happily repeat them ad nauseam so often, they're accepted as fact. GPs and other health professionals are no better - blind adherence to oft repeated dogma.
"Population epidemiological studies and feeding studies" do not prove anything. They may show a relationship between factors, but nothing causative. There are no peer reviewed random control trials to substantiate these wild claims, yet the media happily repeat them ad nauseam so often, they're accepted as fact. GPs and other health professionals are no better - blind adherence to oft repeated dogma.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff