Reply To This Post         Return to Posts Index           VegSource Home


From: The Sproutarian (110.22.102.86)
Subject:         Re: My Zinc and Copper yesterday + fairytale ideas on nutrition + questionable high fruit diets
Date: November 12, 2014 at 5:50 am PST

In Reply to: Re: My Zinc and Copper yesterday + fairytale ideas on nutrition posted by temp on November 12, 2014 at 4:45 am:

Well said Temp, spot on with many things there, and yes, the 80-10-10 is potential a deadly diet because it is a starvation diet in theory and highly unbalanced which can lead to countless potential health problems. We know the success rate on such a diet is very low, yet people still promote this type of diet without issuing significant warnings to those who may wish to try it.

Yes, low cholesterol can have negative impacts on hormonal levels and the low ALA omega 3 can also convert on the low side of EPA/DHA. I have done the maths on the 801-10 style of high fruit diet and l know that the EPA/DHA gets slightly under – slightly over the lowest recommended amounts needed of the EPA/DHA, BUT…there is now lots of science suggesting current RDA’s for EPA/DHA is way under what is really needed, and if this is true then the 80-10-10 is another potential disaster that can bring on disease, and given that the synergy of copper/zinc is all messed up the conversion to the omega 3 long chains is going to be close rock bottom because the high levels of bioavailable zinc needed is not present in that type of diet due to lack of synergy decreasing metabolism of that nutrient.

Also...the excess potassium in the 80-10-10 type of diet has the problem of further reducing zinc absorption and increasing copper. Potential low iron levels also increases copper absorption and reduces zinc. In effect, when we take all these things into account, the 80-10-10 is a potential disaster of nightmare levels, and it is hardly surprising so few succeed on such a diet. The theory tells us that it should not work, and the reality backs this up for most people.

Temp...the potential for disaster on this diet goes far further than the issues l bring up here. I now have studies on excessive glucose levels in the diet and it's negative effect on brain functioning.


Glucose Levels and Risk of Dementia
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1215740


chronically higher blood glucose levels exert a negative influence on cognition, possibly mediated by structural changes in learning-relevant brain areas
http://www.neurology.org/content/81/20/1746.abstract


Now...the fruit people will argue that the glycemic index and loading ensures that blood sugar won't rise too high from most fruits, but we know that these indexes are flawed because people can still get high blood sugar from eating fruit. Basically this flawed glycemic theory is used to justify the fruit people's flawed diet theories.


The glycemic index scam:

"one huge problem with the GI index tables is that they are not reproducible. Test one group of people with the food and you will get one value. Test another group and you'll get another value. And that is just what happens to the averages. Test three individuals and you will get three different values. The authors of the theory really stretch to explain why this happens, because nonreproducible results usually mean death for a scientific theory.

The Glycemic Index tells you only what these foods do to the blood sugar of a normal person two hours after they eat the food. It does not tell you what they do to that blood sugar one hour after eating them, or--and this can be very important for pasta--four hours after eating them.

And even more importantly, the Glycemic Index does not tell you how much insulin the body had to secrete to process the glucose that resulted from the digestion of this food when it finally did digest".

------------


People need to be careful of the fairytales people bring up when promoting high fruit diets.

We also have to remember that it is suggested that very few people do well on high carb low fat diets. Instead it is said that people do better on lower carb and not so low fat. There is a bunch of literature strong speaking out against the dangers of low fat high carb diets, and the warnings mirror Raw Christina's recent blood results. Her doctor tried to justify the results, but the studies and other doctors and put his opinion seriously in question.

People are also said to do better on lower carb diets because most people are said to be fast oxidizers, therefore a high fruit diet only suits the minority of people.

It's time to take the blinkers off and really look at what's going on. People need to start tailoring diets to the individual and ditch the silly theories because humans are not robots…we all have different macronutrient ratios and micronutrient levels that work for us, and saying all people should go 90-05-05 or 80-10-10 etc displays profound ignorance in dietary understanding, and you want to keep well away from any raw leaders who promote such dubious ideas because we are not all robots.

I could go on and on and smash these type of diets into the ground just as well or even better than Dr Clement could, but this will do for now. Temp…l want to wake people up to the fairytales because l want to see more people succeed at a vegan diet if they can.

Reply To This Post         Return to Posts Index           VegSource Home


Follow Ups:



Post Reply

Name:
E-mail: (optional)
Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: