|
|
Author |
Message |
|
|
Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:09 am |
DrJ...*sigh* ... I try...
Firefox,
Meat? Raw fish. Not often 2 x a week? Or so. Lots of veggies though. I am lousy about taking supplements.
Dairy? No. Lactose intolerant. Quite a bit of soy milk, but that doesn't count. Lots of green tea. Coffee.
My H has been bugging me to eat in the AM, I don't. Don't like to. Don't feel hungry, so don't eat. Why force the issue? I am healthy as a horse. But...there are energy drops...so...either getting old...or bad eating habits...prolly both. I hate cooking. That doesn't help either. I eat out, but eat healthy. Night market, vegetarian places. BBQ stuff. Blood. Some meat..chicken, rarely. I don't like nuts. |
_________________ If you make, first do no harm, your Law, you will never strike the first blow and will be known as a man of peace who can fight like ten tigers, a Human in the act of Being. There is no greater rank than this. Ashida Kim on War.~Cellese~AnteAge Serum and Accelerator, DermaRoller ,MyFawnie AA2G serum, KNN G ForceUltrasound., SEA, ChrySun 25% ZnO |
|
|
|
Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:30 pm |
I'm against taking supplements. I do take some though, Vit C, Zinc, Fish Oil and Calcium. BTW, did everyone see the latest on Clacium tablets. Apparently the calcium clumps in the blood and can cause a blockage which in turn causes a heart attack - yes, more doom and gloom.
I know that some here on EDS spend up to $300.00 a week on supplements - which, IMO, is ridiculous. Supplements cannot and do not make up for a deficient diet. In Australia, all vitamins are labeled to that effect. And the weird thing is that the people who are prone to taking supplements are mainly the health conscious who avoid processed foods and yet are quite happy to take processed supplements. Doesn't make sense to me. Nothing can replace eating a healthy balanced diet - which, in the developed world, we have at our fingertips.
The supplement industry is just a giant cash cow - the shelves in our pharmacies and supermarkets are just getting filled with more and more little pills all guaranteeing to make our children smarter, our lives longer and our sex lives more satisfying.
We're living in a time when food is becoming the enemy but popping a pill is considered a "health benefit". I'm not buying it.
ETA: With regard to the title of this thread: Beauty from Within - Does it Work. If so What & Why? As the old saying goes, "We are what we eat" so health and looking well does come from within - it comes from fueling our body with the best possible nutrients. No pill or topical potion is going to improve your health if you don't eat properly. |
_________________ Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:44 am |
Hi Keliu,
I'm not polarized on this issue. I support my health with a combination of whole foods and supplements.
Regarding your comment:
Nothing can replace eating a healthy balanced diet - which, in the developed world, we have at our fingertips.
You might find the books by Michael Pollan to be very interesting.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:07 am |
Barefootgirl wrote: |
You might find the books by Michael Pollan to be very interesting. |
Quote: |
Had a cursory look - and I have to say I agree with what he says:
Food. There’s plenty of it around, and we all love to eat it. So why should anyone need to defend it?
Because most of what we’re consuming today is not food, and how we’re consuming it — in the car, in front of the TV, and increasingly alone — is not really eating. Instead of food, we’re consuming “edible foodlike substances” — no longer the products of nature but of food science. Many of them come packaged with health claims that should be our first clue they are anything but healthy. In the so-called Western diet, food has been replaced by nutrients, and common sense by confusion. The result is what Michael Pollan calls the American paradox: The more we worry about nutrition, the less healthy we seem to become.
But if real food — the sort of food our great grandmothers would recognize as food — stands in need of defense, from whom does it need defending? From the food industry on one side and nutritional science on the other. Both stand to gain much from widespread confusion about what to eat, a question that for most of human history people have been able to answer without expert help. Yet the professionalization of eating has failed to make Americans healthier. Thirty years of official nutritional advice has only made us sicker and fatter while ruining countless numbers of meals.
Pollan proposes a new (and very old) answer to the question of what we should eat that comes down to seven simple but liberating words: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. By urging us to once again eat food, he challenges the prevailing nutrient-by-nutrient approach — what he calls nutritionism — and proposes an alternative way of eating that is informed by the traditions and ecology of real, well-grown, unprocessed food. Our personal health, he argues, cannot be divorced from the health of the food chains of which we are part. |
http://michaelpollan.com/books/in-defense-of-food/
He is writing in "defense" of food because, as I said earlier, food has become the "enemy".
But I don't ascribe to the theory that our forefathers had better diets - because they didn't. They certainly didn't have access to the plethora of food-stuffs that we have today and many were malnourished. Today, in the developed world, we have an enormous choice of food - but, unfortunately, people just make the wrong choices.
And I also agree that the way we eat has allot to do with this. "Eating on the run" has become the norm - people don't dine anymore. I can't believe the amount of people who don't cook but just scoff down a smoothie or something. I really look forward to my meal and a glass of red every night! |
_________________ Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:25 am |
My forefathers had better diets than we do here, now.
I am referring to the last few generations. Can't speak too knowledgeably about the ones farther back, lol.
BFG |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:42 am |
Oh, I think our forefathers did have very good diets. Why not? Everything was grown on the farms and brought to the market. Fresh product was everywhere. Buying "local" is the best way because nutrients aren't lost in shipping and transporting to far away places. My mother always talks about the wonderful fresh food she had growing up on a farm in Europe. They were not malnourished in any sense. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:46 am |
leeleedeedee wrote: |
Oh, I think our forefathers did have very good diets. Why not? Everything was grown on the farms and brought to the market. Fresh product was everywhere. Buying "local" is the best way because nutrients aren't lost in shipping and transporting to far away places. My mother always talks about the wonderful fresh food she had growing up on a farm in Europe. They were not malnourished in any sense. |
I suppose it depends on who your forefathers were, and the period of time. Irish, during the potato famine? Not so good. Eskimos? Good on fatty fish, not so good on veges. Paleo diets inform but not practical for most as the prep times are longer than the time spent in line at McD's. . |
_________________ Physician - scientist - curmudgeon. Kind to animals and stem cells. Nonprofit muckraking site: www.barefacedtruth.com. Day job: www.anteage.com |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:46 am |
It goes without saying that during a period of famine good diet was impossible. My point was that during relative stable periods people were able to live quite healthy.
I live way up in Northern Canada, close to the Inuit. They may not have had veggies like we do but they always had things in their diet that made up for the lack of veggies and other nutrients. This was compensated by eating all of the seal, for example. By doing this they received many different nutrients. No Inuit died from malnutrition. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:49 pm |
Keliu wrote: |
BTW, did everyone see the latest on Clacium tablets. Apparently the calcium clumps in the blood and can cause a blockage which in turn causes a heart attack - yes, more doom and gloom.
|
Here's the deal with calcium: it needs enough magnesium and vitamin K2 to be properly processed by the body and incorporated into bone tissue or else it tends to be deposited in soft tissue and joint tissue, as well as incorporated into arterial plaque (which is mostly calcium, not cholesterol).
If you get enough mag/K2 which most people don't these days, calcium is not an issue.
If you're going to take calcium, make sure it's not the carbonate form. Carbonate is limestone/chalk- not the best absorbed. Citrate-malate, gluconate or hydroxyapetite are better forms. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:17 pm |
Keliu wrote: |
BTW, did everyone see the latest on Clacium tablets. Apparently the calcium clumps in the blood and can cause a blockage which in turn causes a heart attack - yes, more doom and gloom. |
Yes, I posted that article in the lounge. It ticks me off when doctors shove it down our throats that we should be taking calcium supplements to prevent osteoperosis for years and years, which I have taken daily for at least a decade. And now...it's considered dangerous? Makes me feel like chucking all my supplements for fear they will all be found to cause cancer, bone loss, heart attacks or what have you. |
_________________ 49 years young, brown hair/eyes, Careprost, Ageless If You Dare, Tanaka massage ツ |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:32 pm |
DrJ wrote: |
leeleedeedee wrote: |
Oh, I think our forefathers did have very good diets. Why not? Everything was grown on the farms and brought to the market. Fresh product was everywhere. Buying "local" is the best way because nutrients aren't lost in shipping and transporting to far away places. My mother always talks about the wonderful fresh food she had growing up on a farm in Europe. They were not malnourished in any sense. |
I suppose it depends on who your forefathers were, and the period of time. Irish, during the potato famine? Not so good. Eskimos? Good on fatty fish, not so good on veges. Paleo diets inform but not practical for most as the prep times are longer than the time spent in line at McD's. . |
Yes it does depend on where you are. I made a sweeping statement but I still think it applies. In Victorian times only the wealthy had enought to eat, the buk of people lived on a subsistence diet. Millions of people died in China from starvation in the 1950s. My own parents went though rationing during WWII when next to nothing was available. My own father was raised in an orphanage and all the boys were given for dinner was a glass of milk and a slice of bread and butter - that would be considered child abuse today.
But I'm old enough to remember when there weren't such things as supermarkets. There definitely wasn't the plethora of food stuffs available as there is today. Plus we have the advantage of refrigeration. Basically, we have never had it so good when it comes to the availability of food. But the introduction of supermarkets bought with it the advent of packaged and processed foods - and this is what people rely on heavily today.
All I'm trying to point out is that, today, we have the ability to eat very well if we make the right choices. |
_________________ Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:32 pm |
sandooch wrote: |
Keliu wrote: |
BTW, did everyone see the latest on Clacium tablets. Apparently the calcium clumps in the blood and can cause a blockage which in turn causes a heart attack - yes, more doom and gloom. |
Yes, I posted that article in the lounge. It ticks me off when doctors shove it down our throats that we should be taking calcium supplements to prevent osteoperosis for years and years, which I have taken daily for at least a decade. And now...it's considered dangerous? Makes me feel like chucking all my supplements for fear they will all be found to cause cancer, bone loss, heart attacks or what have you. |
Yep, I know what you mean. On one side of my family I have a history of osteoporosis. And on the other side is heart disease and high cholesterol. I just can't win
I appreciate the input on the magnesium and k2. I'll have to look closer into that. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:03 pm |
DragoN wrote: |
DrJ...*sigh* ... I try...
Firefox,
Meat? Raw fish. Not often 2 x a week? Or so. Lots of veggies though. I am lousy about taking supplements.
Dairy? No. Lactose intolerant. Quite a bit of soy milk, but that doesn't count. Lots of green tea. Coffee.
My H has been bugging me to eat in the AM, I don't. Don't like to. Don't feel hungry, so don't eat. Why force the issue? I am healthy as a horse. But...there are energy drops...so...either getting old...or bad eating habits...prolly both. I hate cooking. That doesn't help either. I eat out, but eat healthy. Night market, vegetarian places. BBQ stuff. Blood. Some meat..chicken, rarely. I don't like nuts. |
So what are you eating for complete protein? Little fish, little meat, no dairy, no nuts. Eggs or are you practically vegan? Yoghurt (low lactose)? Are you eating plenty of other healthy fats?
Energy drops is a symptom ... maybe that you do need to eat in the morning?! Sure your stress hormones can release glycogen from storage but why make it? Caffeine can muck about with the blood sugar and suppress hunger.
I have all my nutrition clients 'eat' first thing - for some that is a simple carton of yoghurt or frozen fruit smoothie. Liquid is fine, doesn't have to be a solid breakfast if you can't face it. Just something to kickstart the metabolism and gut, stabilise the blood sugar, reassure your body there is no famine, encourage healthier choices the remainder of the day and so on. |
_________________ Sensitivity, forehead pigmentation & elevens, nose & chin clogged pores. Topicals: Aloe vera, squalane, lactic acid, Myfawnie KinNiaNag HG: Weleda calendula, Lanolips, Guinot masque essentiel, Flexitol Naturals, Careprost. Gadgets: Vaughter dermarollers, Lightstim. |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:10 pm |
I like to melt a stick of butter on low then drink it. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:21 pm |
gretchen wrote: |
I like to melt a stick of butter on low then drink it. |
Oh Boy...yummy! |
_________________ I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:26 pm |
Dragon, eating only when you're hungry is IMO the best way to go. And when you crave something, look into it. The body has its own mechanisms to tell us what we need, if only we would care to really listen (and not smother the signals with fixed meal times and easy ready made stuff full of sugar and salt and artificial flavouring).
As I have told before, until fairly recently I only ate once a day. Now that I am older (50) my metabolism is changing and I need a meal somewhere midday, but only a light meal. No snacking, just eat when hungry. This has kept me on the exact same weight since age 29, with a few relatively short intervals when pregnant. After both pregnancies, I was back at my normal weight (and my jeans size) about 3 months after giving birth. When pregnant I ate whenever hungry, which was very often. Two beautiful babies, lots of very nutritious breastmilk, never any troube with my skin at all, healthy except for arthritis after second child.
I am convinced that the key to a healthy diet is, to learn to listen to your body and not to eat because it's convention or convenient but to eat because your body tells you it's time. And cook from scratch so you know there is nothing in it that shouldn't be there (artificial stuff, sweeteners, syrup, salt....) Or find a very good restaurant (real good Chinese restaurants make very healthy food, prepared stir fry with very healthy oils and spices, just about the best food in the world IMO). |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:16 pm |
DarkMoon wrote: |
gretchen wrote: |
I like to melt a stick of butter on low then drink it. |
Oh Boy...yummy! |
Actually I first read about eating more butter from a writer Nancy Deville who says she has eaten a lb butter per week the last 15 years, she had a video about it on You Tube but took it down.
Ray Peat says the saturated fats are protective/anti inflammatory against the build up of PUFAs we have in our body fat that are constantly being released and damaging the thyroid, slowing the metabolism, damaging the skin etc. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:21 pm |
gretchen wrote: |
DarkMoon wrote: |
gretchen wrote: |
I like to melt a stick of butter on low then drink it. |
Oh Boy...yummy! |
Actually I first read about eating more butter from a writer Nancy Deville who says she has eaten a lb butter per week the last 15 years, she had a video about it on You Tube but took it down.
Ray Peat says the saturated fats are protective/anti inflammatory against the build up of PUFAs we have in our body fat that are constantly being released and damaging the thyroid, slowing the metabolism, damaging the skin etc. |
I just have to ask who in the world is Ray Peat you keep repeating his name and you tube this, you tube that, radio this. I mean no offense but the way you keep phrasing it all, if we eat or drink anything, were getting wrinkles. H
how about age is going to do that all by its miraculous self |
|
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:22 pm |
gretchen wrote: |
DarkMoon wrote: |
gretchen wrote: |
I like to melt a stick of butter on low then drink it. |
Oh Boy...yummy! |
Actually I first read about eating more butter from a writer Nancy Deville who says she has eaten a lb butter per week the last 15 years, she had a video about it on You Tube but took it down.
Ray Peat says the saturated fats are protective/anti inflammatory against the build up of PUFAs we have in our body fat that are constantly being released and damaging the thyroid, slowing the metabolism, damaging the skin etc. |
Well gretchen I sure hope your new found diet works wonders for you!
I guess I will just inflame myself right into old age! |
_________________ I'LL SEE YOU ON THE DARKSIDE OF THE MOON.... |
|
|
|
Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:34 pm |
There are 91.65 grams of fat in a stick of butter and 29 grams of fat in a Big Mac. So you are actually consuming the equivalent fat of three and a half Big Macs in one hit. |
_________________ Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:11 am |
In my personal view, it's not a good thing to get all your information from one perceived guru.
But hey,I'm just a critical thinker, so what do I know?
BFG
That said: Happy Birthday Andrew Weil! (not my guru, just respected) |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:22 am |
Keliu wrote: |
There are 91.65 grams of fat in a stick of butter and 29 grams of fat in a Big Mac. So you are actually consuming the equivalent fat of three and a half Big Macs in one hit. |
Yeah I suppose I could eat a low fat diet, um, already did- it made me sick.
What eating low fat does to your skin:
Oh well 50 years of indoctrination, there are some things you really can't un-learn. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:55 am |
Lotusesther, "stirfries in healthy oils", what do you mean when you say healthy oils?
Regarding gretchen, well, what about the french? They eat a lot of butter etc. (and red wine I know.) So do you have any pictures of someone from France gretchen?
ETA: I can't post a pic but how about Mireille Guiliano, author of "French women don't get fat". She's 66 and eats a french sort of diet. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:09 am |
gretchen wrote: |
Keliu wrote: |
There are 91.65 grams of fat in a stick of butter and 29 grams of fat in a Big Mac. So you are actually consuming the equivalent fat of three and a half Big Macs in one hit. |
Yeah I suppose I could eat a low fat diet, um, already did- it made me sick.
|
How about a happy medium in between low fat that made you sick and the 3 big macs worth of fat? |
|
|
|
|
Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:36 am |
rileygirl wrote: |
gretchen wrote: |
Keliu wrote: |
There are 91.65 grams of fat in a stick of butter and 29 grams of fat in a Big Mac. So you are actually consuming the equivalent fat of three and a half Big Macs in one hit. |
Yeah I suppose I could eat a low fat diet, um, already did- it made me sick.
|
How about a happy medium in between low fat that made you sick and the 3 big macs worth of fat? |
Nope I'm thinner and better off on the higher fat diet. You will have to do your own research to understand.
MG eats bread and likely not the amount of fat that would make an anti wrinkle difference- a disproporionate amount of PUFA to SF:
As opposed to Lita Lee who likely is OLDER
and eats little PUFA and a lot of SF:
|
|
|
|
Thu Mar 28, 2024 3:24 pm |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
|
|
|