US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 54293 times.

DaveC113

  • Industry Contributor
  • Posts: 4352
  • ZenWaveAudio.com
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #120 on: 26 Jun 2012, 08:22 pm »
Question:  Is wheat/glutton bad because it is genetically mutated? 

As far as I know, there's no mutated stuff in Europe.  So, it's ok to eat say imported pasta from Europe?  Not even sure that is available... but hypothetically speaking.

Also, Bud is bad but Heineken is good?

Modern wheat is a polyploid (contains multiple sets of chromosomes) organism, bred by Norman Borlaug who won a nobel peace prize for it. An unfortunate side effect of the breeding was that the new wheat creates types of glutens that seem to be bad news for humans. The number of people with wheat allergies has gone from a small fraction of a percent to about 1% now, with many more people having lower level undiagnosed allergic reactions. Einkorn (old) wheat is becoming more popular, it is a diploid species (normal 2 sets of chromosomes) and does not contain some of the most harmful glutens found in modern wheat.

There's tons of info in great detail about this on the net...

Tyson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 11482
  • Without music, life would be a mistake.
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #121 on: 26 Jun 2012, 08:26 pm »
But, new wheat is supposed to be much worse than old wheat?


Correct -the old wheat is bad, the new wheat is much worse.  It's like the difference between a filtered cigarette and a non-filtered cigarette.  The filtered one is "better", but both are pretty bad for you.  Both are toxic.

Atlplasma

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 963
  • Just off the boat
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #122 on: 26 Jun 2012, 09:18 pm »
Correct -the old wheat is bad, the new wheat is much worse.  It's like the difference between a filtered cigarette and a non-filtered cigarette.  The filtered one is "better", but both are pretty bad for you.  Both are toxic.

Curious to know how long you have been "wheat free"?

Tyson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 11482
  • Without music, life would be a mistake.
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #123 on: 26 Jun 2012, 09:28 pm »
I had my heart attack 6 years ago (this August), and I did the standard "low fat" diet for the first 3 years.  Then I went wheat free "sorta" for about 18 months.  I went wheat free "full time" about 18 months ago.  I tried eating wheat a few times after that (pizza, cupcakes, bagels), and each time my GERD flared up like crazy, within half an hour.  Intense abdominal pain is a really good motivator to never, ever eat that crap.....

timind

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3861
  • permanent vacation
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #124 on: 26 Jun 2012, 10:27 pm »
Dang, I eat spoon size shredded wheat cereal with yogurt almost every day for breakfast. I like the fact it has no salt or sugar added.

Mikeinsacramento

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #125 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:24 pm »
Sorry, as the saying goes you're entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts.

You can't argue with the results.

OzarkTom

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #126 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:25 pm »
All grains are bad, not just whaet. There are studies out now that shows you can lower all of these problems just by cutting out the grains.

Lowers cholesterol
lowers triglycerides
lowers high blood pressure
lowers risk of diabetes
lowers risk of Alzheimer's
lowers risk of cancers-pancreatic, colon, stomach and lymphoma
lowers arthritis
lowers depression
lowers obesity

White potatoes and corn should also be added to the list of grains.

Many now are switching to the original paleo or caveman diet to help improve their health. Earlier this year was a program on ABC's Nightline about the Paleo diet. Megan Fox is a fan?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeFlKPUYplM

Atlplasma

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 963
  • Just off the boat
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #127 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:30 pm »
You can't argue with the results.
There's nothing wrong with exercising, and some people can use it and a healthy diet to maintain a target weight. Even so, you might want to experiment with a low-carb diet. You might find that you could focus more on enjoying the outdoors without turning every outing into a workout session.  :thumb: 

werd

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #128 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:36 pm »
Its all about consumption. If you are going pig out on wheat products you are going to get fat. When you get fat your body has harder time repairing and keeping healthy. We are just a bunch of pigs at the trough, that's all it is. Not to mention some people are allergic to gluten and don't know it. That worsens their health situation.

Its just like anything else. It is all about moderation and learning healthy eating habits. It's dam hard but that basically will fix America's Fat Bastard problem.  :lol:


Mikeinsacramento

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #129 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:39 pm »
Yes, the standard "eat less and move more" argument.  Usually uttered by people who have NEVER been seriously overweight for any significant length of time. 

You don't think that overweight people try to exercise and diet?  Man, there is a shitload of money spent in this country on diet and exercise.  And yet we, as a nation, get fatter and fatter.  In fact, the data I've seen shows that we spend MORE time exercising now than we ever have in the past.  Plus, that is the same advice people have been getting for 30 years.  How's that working out so far? 

A better approach is to address hunger.  Because it is a broken hunger mechanism (combined with a broken fat metabolism), which drives obesity.  Your fat is just stored energy.  You should be able to live off that stored energy with very little hunger (it's how we survived famines and ice ages in the past).  But in obese people, there bodies do not "see" the fat, their bodies are "blind" to it. 

Every meal we eat, about half the calories are used for energy by the body immediately - this is for things like keeping our heart beating, our lungs breathing, our brains working, etc...  We can only use half the calories up front like this.  The 2nd half of the calories get shuffled off to our fat cells for temporary storage.  After 2 hours, what SHOULD happen (and does happen in healthy people), is the body simply releases those fat calories so we can make it another 2 or more hours before needing food again.

In people that gain weight, this DOES NOT happen.  They get to the 2 hour mark, the body doesn't see the stored fat calories, but it still needs energy to run.  So it sends out hunger signals.  Because your heart, brain, lungs, cells, all need energy to run.  So you eat again.  And half the calories get used immediately by your body, the other half go to your fat cells.  And the cycle repeats. 

THIS is how people gain weight.  Now, tell me how "eating less and moving more" is gonna address these metabolic issues?

You describe an anomoly as I have never seen it happen.  I've been involved in sports since 1966 and never seen this.  We have 120 kids on our swim team, and since we joined in 1994, there has never been a fat kid on it.  For the vast majority of people, simply getting off your ass will solve the problem. 

I objected to the title of the documentary, "The Men Who Made You Fat", because it is irresponsible to otherwise healthy people.  According to the scenario you present, an actual health condition that makes you fat, the documentary also does not apply, because the health condition is at fault, not "The Men".

kenreau

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #130 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:48 pm »
Nice to see this thread get fired up again.  In skimming the past few pages, I see Food Inc & King Corn already mentioned.  A more recent one that rocked my world is Forks Over Knives.  http://www.forksoverknives.com/  You can watch the documentary on DVD or free streaming at the usual netflix, amazon, etc sites.  The punch line is to go all Vegan / Plant based diet.  Avoid Animal based foods as much as possible.

I've got high Cholesterol (typically 260 to 280 range in years past) and a family history, on both sides, of heart disease, alzheimers, cancer, etc.  Over the past +/-5 years, I've cut out most dairy products and scaled way back on the red meat, eggs and usual suspects.  My stats barely moved.  For the past 5 years my Cholesterol has hovered in the 250 range.

After watching Forks Over Knives this spring, I jumped in with both feet and went 98% Vegan for two months.  I recently turned 50 and did not want to go on the statins, or risk other health concerns.  After the two months I had my Cholesterol checked.  Total Cholesterol dropped from 259 down to 219.  LDL went from 154 to 133.  I am stoked.  I also lost about 8 lbs.  Hard to argue with those kinds of results, drug free.

Fwiw, for me, 98% Vegan means I will still occasionally (1 meal week) eat wild Salmon or have a couple of eggs with a breakfast.  No industrialized / commercial meats if at all possible {see Food Inc}.  Most of my meat substitutes come from Soy and Seitan products.  I'll always request at least a Vegitarian meal when we go out to dinner.

I'm going to keep this up for ~ 6 months and see if I can get my total Cholesterol down closer to the 200 range.

Kenreau

 

Mikeinsacramento

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #131 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:49 pm »
There's nothing wrong with exercising, and some people can use it and a healthy diet to maintain a target weight. Even so, you might want to experiment with a low-carb diet. You might find that you could focus more on enjoying the outdoors without turning every outing into a workout session.  :thumb:

I don't have a target weight, never had one.  Your comment illustrates a factor of the obesity problem.  This obsession with target weights, calorie counts and food groups. 

Lifestyle dictates diet....for healthy people.  If you have a medical condition that makes you fat, then that has to be addressed.

2bigears

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #132 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:49 pm »
 :D  the 350 pound spokes-man for 'the heart attack grill' just died....they will feed you free if your over a certain weight there. crazy stuff.
     SUGAR IS THE BIG THING TOO..    sugar has a big black eye these days for good reason.. :D  We all just eat too much to....it's our culture/pass time/crutch/feel good go to.... :D

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3729
  • Music a bubble, not looking for trouble.
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #133 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:50 pm »
Its all about consumption. If you are going pig out on wheat products you are going to get fat. When you get fat your body has harder time repairing and keeping healthy. We are just a bunch of pigs at the trough, that's all it is. Not to mention some people are allergic to gluten and don't know it. That worsens their health situation.

Its just like anything else. It is all about moderation and learning healthy eating habits. It's dam hard but that basically will fix America's Fat Bastard problem.  :lol:

No it isn't about moderation. It's about the crap we ingest. Do you really think obesity AND diabetes at this rate and scale (it's an EPIDEMIC) both here and other countries is just due to people overstuffing their faces and not walking it off? Seriously?

werd

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #134 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:51 pm »
No it isn't about moderation. It's about the crap we ingest. Do you really think obesity AND diabetes at this rate and scale (it's an EPIDEMIC) both here and other countries is just due to people overstuffing their faces and not walking it off? Seriously?


Yes

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3729
  • Music a bubble, not looking for trouble.
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #135 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:53 pm »
You describe an anomoly as I have never seen it happen.  I've been involved in sports since 1966 and never seen this.  We have 120 kids on our swim team, and since we joined in 1994, there has never been a fat kid on it.  For the vast majority of people, simply getting off your ass will solve the problem. 

I objected to the title of the documentary, "The Men Who Made You Fat", because it is irresponsible to otherwise healthy people.  According to the scenario you present, an actual health condition that makes you fat, the documentary also does not apply, because the health condition is at fault, not "The Men".

Frankly your experience is irrelevant. The mountain of evidence is already there.

wushuliu

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3729
  • Music a bubble, not looking for trouble.
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #136 on: 26 Jun 2012, 11:53 pm »

Yes

Well just like I said above about opinion vs facts.

And if you've managed to be awesome and take charge of your health with a little elbow grease and moderation and just plain ol common sense, then good for you. Please forgive the rest of us lazy bums who seem to be having a harder time of it and our penchant for taking a more... complicated approach.

OzarkTom

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #137 on: 27 Jun 2012, 12:07 am »
100 years ago, 1 of 100,000 people had diabetes. Today, it is 1 of 4. If you count pre-diabetes, it is 1 of 3. 75 years ago, 3% of the population had heart disease. Today, it is about 40%.

Grains and sugar are the leading causes.

To eat healthy, walk around the perimeter of your store and buy those foods. The junk foods are all down the middle aisles.

werd

Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #138 on: 27 Jun 2012, 12:13 am »
Well just like I said above about opinion vs facts.

Dude there is no getting around it. The only real control you have is moderation. Toxins are everywhere. The best advice ime has always been pay attention to foo d you eat and how it effects you. Everyone is different so diet advice for one person may not work for another person. It's up to the individual to feel out their own food. If you eat pancakes in the morning with some toast and you feel bloated and tired .. Thats bad. But if you eat some morning porage and it's gets you hopping and feeling optimistic that's a good sign that the food is not dragging you down. If you eat too much porage and it's makes feel heavy well... Don't eat that much porage. But don't stop eating porage.

ctviggen

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 5251
Re: US Food Consumption - Data, Trends, and Analysis
« Reply #139 on: 27 Jun 2012, 12:13 am »
Nice to see this thread get fired up again.  In skimming the past few pages, I see Food Inc & King Corn already mentioned.  A more recent one that rocked my world is Forks Over Knives.  http://www.forksoverknives.com/  You can watch the documentary on DVD or free streaming at the usual netflix, amazon, etc sites.  The punch line is to go all Vegan / Plant based diet.  Avoid Animal based foods as much as possible.

I've got high Cholesterol (typically 260 to 280 range in years past) and a family history, on both sides, of heart disease, alzheimers, cancer, etc.  I recently turned 50 and in an attempt to bring down the Cholesterol to a reasonable level and avoid the statins, I cut out 95% of dairy products and scaled back red meats & eggs to once a week.  For the past 5 years my cholesterol has hovered in the 250 range. 

After watching Forks Over Knives this spring, I jumped in with both feet and went 98% Vegan for two months and had my Cholesterol checked.  Total Cholesterol dropped from 259 down to 219.  LDL went from 134 to 133.  I am stoked.  I also lost about 8 lbs.  Hard to argue with those kinds of results, drug free.

Actually, it's very easy to argue against those kind of results. First, total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, none of these are good indicators of heart disease risk.  In fact, they're horrible indicators of heart disease risk.  They're wrong near 50% of the time.  So, you're results don't mean much.

Second, you could've made all of your improvement from lowering your carbohydrate content.

As for Forks Over Knives, it's epidemiological garbage.  It's people believing in what they want to believe and ignoring any potentially negative data. See, e.g.:

http://rawfoodsos.com/2011/09/22/forks-over-knives-is-the-science-legit-a-review-and-critique/#more-1487

I could go on and on and on about why an n=1 sample (of yourself) is meaningless, but I really don't have the time now.

PS -- As for statins, if you examine the total death rate from those taking statins versus the total death rate from those who do not, in double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, the overall death rate is the same.  Yes, that's right, the same.