Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science

Scientific Battlegrounds in Diets 765

There's an interesting article currently carried by the NYTimes (free reg. yada yada) that talks about the world of dieting, National Institutes of Health, Atkins as well as low-carb vs low-fat. The interesting thing, from a scientific perspective, is the sheer lack of study - and the reticence from the scientific community to question the party line.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Scientific Battlegrounds in Diets

Comments Filter:
  • by jockm ( 233372 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:25PM (#3846663) Homepage
    Right now I'm loosing 1-2lbs per week on a traditional low fat moderate exersize diet. Nothing special, just eating healther and in moderation. I've been doing this for six months now without problem.

    I think the truth is that there are different diets that work for different people. A one size fits all approach probably won't be the answer here. until we do more good science on the subject, I'm skeptical of anyone who says there is one true way.
  • Re:Moderation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Peyna ( 14792 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:28PM (#3846683) Homepage
    Yah, I never found it all that hard. Eat healthy food. Healthy not being in a box in a grocery store that says "99% fat free". Healthy food being everything in that colorful corner of the grocery store. Fruits, vegetables, and if you eat meat, eat it. I recommend fish, salmon, etc. if you're going to eat meat, but some people love their beef, so I guess eat it.

    "Diets" don't work. By definition they are temporary and restrictive. Instead, just eat GOOD food. It's pretty simple what's GOOD food. That extra large pizza with extra cheese? Not good. That orange and apple over there? Good. Those vegetables? Good.

    Don't eat too many potatoes or excessively high carb foods, but don't eat nothing but steak either. Thus, eat everything in moderation, mostly good food, but don't deny yourself bad food either. Besides, most 'healthy' food that isn't processed and stamped with the 99% fat free label, is pretty good tasting. You don't hear many people saying "Boy, that orange sure was disgusting," unless it was a rotten one.

    And exercise too, but do something fun. I don't know how people can ride stationary bikes or run on treadmills for an hour every day. The boredom kills me. I play racquetball and other active sports.

    In summary, it's pretty much the same stuff you've been hearing all along: eat good food, and exercise. What qualifies as 'good food' is pretty easy to figure out.
  • by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:30PM (#3846700) Homepage Journal
    The only reason that `low fat' diets fail is because of a lack of personal willpower, and an absurd notion that one can turn ship overnight and change everything about themselves: If you grew up eating roast beef and butter soaked mashed potatoes, the idea that you'll switch to veggies and soy overnight is absolutely absurd. Yet that's the way that many people approach dieting (Countless sitcoms follow the story of "Jimmy got a warning from the doctor, so the wife now only feeds him spinach and oatmeal"). Anything that is approached with such immediacy is virtually always doomed to failure: The person at work who won't stop yapping about their new diet is virtually yelling out loud "I am going to fail". The guy who just started going to the gym every now and then, coupled with an improved awareness and self-control, and perhaps some good product choices (by making simple choices one can dramatically decrease your caloric intake).

    The Atkins diet goes over well in North America because the standard North American diet just happens to be rich on fat, rich on protein, and short on carbs : Going on the Atkins diet is basically saying "Eat what you eat, just be cognizant of it". For "fatty", such a food awareness is a good approach because it's less likely to be perceived as "all or nothing": You haven't given up if you have a Big Mac or a steak. Yet at the same time there are countless very active, very healthy (probably in much better cardiac shape than the average Atkins diet fan) people living on zero saturated fat.

    BTW: The saddest thing about the whole diet fad is that the lazy, gas pedal public perceives health as being merely about food. How far from the truth that is. Gaining some muscle mass not only makes you more capable of handling yourself, but it also raises your basal metabolic rate (muscles consume energy just to exist). If people just got off their sorry, lazy asses and DID SOMETHING their would be far less obesity among the sedentary population. I have no doubt that there are people who have hormone imbalances, but for every one of them there are about 4 who, between stuffing back a Big Mac and Super Monster Large Fries is crying about their poor genetics DAMNIT GET ME A BEER! Apart from the extreme outliers with physical handicaps, anyone who doesn't exercise at least 30 minutes every other day, and who eats with disregard, should realize that they are making their own bed.
  • shhh magic secret (Score:2, Insightful)

    by tomstdenis ( 446163 ) <tomstdenis@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:35PM (#3846728) Homepage
    less food in + get off ass => healthier

    I dunno why people assume that instantly dropping 20lbs in a week is a sign of being "healthier". I'd say picking up more energy, stamina, better moods, better social interactions is also ideal.

    Little known fact but being healthier normally reduces stress on the body even before you lose your first pound [or gain muscle].

    People gotta stop looking at the scale and just eat reasonable portions of food.

    Duh....

    Tom
  • by Lemmy Caution ( 8378 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:37PM (#3846739) Homepage
    The only reason that `low fat' diets fail is because of a lack of personal willpower

    Since diets are for humans, and not for iron-willed Nietzschean super-heros who heed not the plaints of crude appetite, nor the pangs of hunger, a diet that doesn't work for the averagely-will-powered person is a pretty bad diet. (This logic is also useful for other domains.)

    The fact that the dieting population has been getting poor advice for the past several years could also have something to do with the obesity problem, ya think? Naaawww, it's far better for you to be a judgemental jerk.

    You know, your attitude betrays a fascinating, yet increasingly common, combination of ignorance and arrogance, that I'm struggling to come up with a new term for it. It's a combination of asshole and moron. Are you an assron or a mohole?

  • by dublin ( 31215 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:43PM (#3846774) Homepage
    The interesting thing, from a scientific perspective, is the sheer lack of study - and the reticence from the scientific community to question the party line.

    Wow. Sounds just like evolution. What a coincidence. (Seriously, this isn't a troll (although I fear it will be moderated as one), but rather a sober observation that science is not often interested in investigating things that don't fit with the current body of popular opinion. Regardless of one's opinions on diets or evolution, there is clearly much more real science needing to be done before anyone should run around claiming an exclusive on the facts. In general that hardest thing for scientists to admit is that we simply don't know, even when that's the honest answer...)
  • by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @10:56PM (#3846836) Homepage Journal

    Since diets are for humans, and not for iron-willed Nietzschean super-heros who heed not the plaints of crude appetite, nor the pangs of hunger, a diet that doesn't work for the averagely-will-powered person is a pretty bad diet.

    And my point was that "diets", in the traditional sense (meaning "instant consumption behaviour changes"), are almost always doomed to failure because of willpower cannot hold up to such a sharp change in personal habits (note that kids who are brought up eating healthy foods often persist in that habit, and continue to eat healthy foods. In essence if you have bad habits, blame your parents). The only likely to be successful approach is to become gradually aware of what you're eating (and substitute where possible), increase physical activity, and just get on with it. In a nutshell: Eat healthy and be active.

    You know, your attitude betrays a fascinating, yet increasingly common, combination of ignorance and arrogance, that I'm struggling to come up with a new term for it. It's a combination of asshole and moron. Are you an assron or a mohole?

    The irony, of course, is that my "you are in charge of your own destiny" attitude is far LESS common nowadays (coincidentally coupled with a ballooning Western public with obeisity rates bordering on an epidemic). Instead we live in a "oh, it's not your fault!" society that gives everyone an out. Again, I'll reiterate: There are people with thyroid disorders or other health problems that make it especially hard (there are people who exercise every day and eat reasonably, yet they still can't lose the weight), but on the other hand there are countless zero-activity gluttons who try to put themselves in the same league: It's absurd, and it's an offense and affront to people who truly are trying and aren't making headway. Obesity brings along with it such an unbelievable array of health problems, as well as professional problems (I believe I read that an obese professional is 28x less likely to get a promotion) that it is something that people need to get a grasp on.

    BTW: A wise piece of advice I heard once went as such - "If you avoid it once at the grocery store, you won't have to avoid it dozens of times at home". The advice deals with things like chips, ice cream, etc: If you have the willpower to say no at the grocery store, then you won't have to muster up the willpower several times a day when you open the fridge, etc.

  • Re:Diet gurus? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gfxguy ( 98788 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:04PM (#3846889)
    Due to a muscle tissue infection that had nothing to do with diet. And HIS doctor said his arteries were remarkably clear - which is even more remarkable since he's been eating high-fat, high-protien, low-carbs for over 30 years.

    Maybe there's something to it?
  • by zaffir ( 546764 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:08PM (#3846909)
    You're both right. Its shit advice that causes problems, but the majority of people will quit their diet when they haven't lost 5lbs in a few days.

    Also, low-fat diets don't work that well. Cut out the crap food, ESPECIALLY the sugary, processed foods (that includes white breads, not just Snickers), eat a balanced meal, and exercise 30 minutes every other day. It ain't that hard if you know what to do and what to expect: instant weight loss isn't true fat loss (grapefruit diets, for example, just dehydrate you - you only lose water weight), but if you stick to your guns, the loss will come.
  • by bourne ( 539955 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:09PM (#3846921)

    So, let me get this straight:

    • Low-fat diets aren't a cure-all
    • High-protein diets aren't a cure-all
    • High-carb and Low-carb diets have problems

    Gosh, maybe we should be eating - gasp - a balanced diet?

    Now you're talking crazy, man!

    The problem is everyone wants a "magic bullet" and few are willing to do the work unless they can find a "drastic" and flashy diet to throw themselves into.

    Eat a balanced diet (complex carbs, some fat and some protein) and exercise and you'll do fine. Stay off the sugar bombs. Eat less than you burn to lose weight. Buy a sports nutrition book to figure out your requirements, because those are the people who are practiced at this math. And don't expect to lose 10 years of fat in a few months.

    And like your mother always said, eat your peas.

  • by Em Emalb ( 452530 ) <ememalb.gmail@com> on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:24PM (#3846988) Homepage Journal
    from above:
    "I'd say picking up more energy, stamina, better moods, better social interactions is also ideal."

    You are spot on, not too many people seem to pick up on this either. When you are in good physical shape, your mental conditioning is better over all as well (at least in my views it is). The reason for this is because less fatigue, better sleep (that's right, folks, you sleep better when physically tired) and a better diet all help your mental conditioning. This is not news.

    Also, another no-brainer, when you feel good about yourself (and you will, it's amazing) you're outlook on life will change, causing better, more positive social interaction. (I guarantee it!)

    theoretical question time:

    I haven't exercized in years, and am significantly larger/over-weight/out of shape than I used to be. How do I start exercising without feeling like I just ran a marathon and got kicked down the stairs?

    Answer:

    Start slowly. (DUH) Just like you can't expect to lose weight and keep it off if you binge diet, you won't be worth a damn if you try and do the crash course to exercise. Moderation, moderation, moderation. First off, when you start, find something you like to do. If you were a good swimmer, go jump in the local pool, do laps, tread water, whatever you do is better for you than sitting on your butt.

    If you need more motivation, go to a gym and sign up during one of their specials. Usually they will give you a free instructor to help you out.

    If you are in pretty bad shape, try walking. It's wonderful for getting you started.

    Keep it up, and find other like-wise minded geeks/friends/what-have-you to help you. Going to the gym by yourself isn't as good (IMO) as having a good partner with you to help you through the struggles, and periods of laziness.

    Please try this folks, it will change your life...and for the better.
  • I think there already is a term for a combination asshole / moron.

    Anonymous Coward.

  • Re:Factor Analysis (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mosch ( 204 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:28PM (#3847015) Homepage
    I started in January, I started a few things which have made me significantly stronger, and have dropped a little over 4 inches from my waist in the past 6 months.
    • Hitting the gym -- I work out for about an hour, three times a week, to build muscle mass and increase my metabolism.
    • Jogging -- I go jogging every day for about 20 minutes (3 miles)
    • Hiking/Biking -- About once a week I go on a long hike or mountain bike ride.
    • Nothing else
    Sure, I could probably have it work a lot faster if I didn't go out for beers with the guys, if I cut down on the bad-for-you foods, like big tasty steaks, or if I ate more vegetables, but my goal was a painless, sustainable change of lifestyle, not something that'd make me insane after six months and have me just abandon the whole thing.
  • by gessel ( 310103 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:49PM (#3847088) Homepage
    First law of thermodynamics: energy cannot be created or destroyed. 2nd law, everything becomes heat.

    Body temp is 98.6 - to a first approximation this sets energy consumption by the body (exercise and you... anyone? anyone? get hot). 2000 calories/day. 1lb of human fat = 3500 Calories.

    Now here's the simple bit: energy in = energy out + energy retained.

    Put in 3500 calories eating a pound of butter--or 2.5 pounds of pasta--and it will either come out as heat (eg run 35 miles if you weigh 150 lbs to burn it off, or wait 2 days without eating anything else...)

    OR it will stay on your body (=1 lb of fat)

    OR it will come out your anus (eg anal leakage from olestra.).

    THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION.

    There is no magic diet. Zone, Atkins, it's all a bunch of crap... well almost. The real deal is that the difference between a "zone" diet and a NIH diet is relatively trivial. Perhaps a bit too much fat for most hearts, but not really that big a deal. Eating a little more fat and a little less carbohydrate comes out a wash... which is to say the argument is a bunch of crap, the diets don't matter that much.

    One good bit of advice from Atkins et al - avoid sugar. If we all skipped the soda at the PC, and the junk food (oooohhh carboyhdrates.... NAW! just 200 calories a can, 400 for a soda and candy bar = 1/8 of a pound of fat you gain that day).

    Now, as for the carbodhydrate diets: asians eat some of the most carbohydrate rich diets in the world, and have the lowest obesity and heart disease. They come to the US and they get fat. The ratio of fat goes up, which may be significant for heart disease, but the amount of refined sugar explodes, as does the fat... and everything else. Mmmmm BK double and a giant size coke!

    Eat a well balanced diet, get plenty of exercise and forget the Nietzschean crap. Skip the soda, take a walk.

  • by simetra ( 155655 ) on Monday July 08, 2002 @11:58PM (#3847123) Homepage Journal
    Point being, different types of people have different needs. People who've evolved in the arctic, with the limited variety of foodstuffs there, have different tolerances than someone who evolved in Africa, or Europe. Some of us can eat butt-loads of fatty foods without getting fat; some of us can't. Do what works for you. And, avoid refined sugar, it is the tool of the devil.
  • by mesocyclone ( 80188 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2002 @12:33AM (#3847260) Homepage Journal
    While were wandering down the nature trail, keep in mind a few facts...

    Many plants internally produce pesticides of more toxicity than commercial pesticides.

    Meat may have small amounts of antibiotic, but is hardly "stuffed with it." The comment about meat industry and pollution says a lot about your biases and nothing about what is healthy food.

    There was a recent study correlating lifelong use of Soy (in particular, Tofu) with earlier onset of Alzheimers.

    Aflatoxin is an extremely carcinogenic chemical, produced naturally by mold that grows on peanuts, wheat, etc.

    While many advocate getting vitamins from natural sources, vitamin supplements are also good sources for many. Of course, these days there are so many vague links that it is a toss-up as to whether many different substances do you good or harm. Dietary anti-oxidants are one example.

    Studies attempting to correlate specific substances (such as Vitamin E) found in natural foods are very unlikely to be significant, simply because they are going to be retrospective studies and separating out the vitamin E intake from other factors is essentially impossible. It may be statistically possible, but that is only if you ignore the fact that the data itself is of poor quality. This is true of way too many health studies that show a benefit or harm from this or that substance or habit. It is especially true of dietary studies because long term studies rely on accurate reporting, by the patients of their dietary habits... usually long after the fact.

    So, don't read too much into these studies. If you want eternal life, get religion (hey, at least it offers a possibility :-) You won't get it at the vitamin counter, the fresh produce counter, or the organic food store (although you may pick up some nice natural parasites at the latter).

  • by Gooberball ( 588899 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2002 @12:38AM (#3847286)
    >Ever see a fat carnivore?
    >Ever see a skinny cow? (Not counting desert-like
    >lack of food conditions).
    >Carbs are what food eats...
    >(Okay, I'm slightly kidding. Humans
    >are .omnivores.)

    Ever see a cow have to sprint and then tackle it's food to the ground? Ever see a carniove's prey stand patiently as it munches on it.

    Herbivores are fat cause they don't move.

    Eat what you like and excercise.
  • by tifosi ( 9489 ) <gkuniansky&hotmail,com> on Tuesday July 09, 2002 @05:26AM (#3848138)
    Running 3-4 miles per day, can be very bad for you joins and back. I suggest skipping a day before you exercise, allowing your muscles to heal and rest.

    The key is to increase your distance gradually.
  • by Prof_Dagoski ( 142697 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2002 @08:18AM (#3848554) Homepage

    Bad example. Cattle in this country and other developed ones are bred to point of being almost genetically engineered to be, well, beefy. Look at healthy cattle in places like Africa, they're a lot leaner. The same goes with deer and other wild critters. The only fat deer and elk I've seen have been at wildlife shelters. A better comparison would be wild vs domestic animals. You will almost never see an obese wild animal, except maybe Univ. of Michigan squirrels, and animals stocking up for winter. Now, how many of us have a cat or dog that needs a serious diet plan? Quite a few I bet. The scary thing is that analogy may carry over into humans as well. I wonder if our obesity results from the fact that we have tamed ourselves and our environment to the point where we have to creat artifical physical stress to keep us healthy.

  • by CrimsonAvenger ( 580665 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2002 @09:43AM (#3848926)

    As for cancer-in-the-thirties, if you look at breast cancer rates in the US, you'll find that breast cancer is consistently highest in the mid point between two nuclear reactors. And it's a cancer that can strike in the 30's.

    Knowing nothing about breast cancer (other than that more women get it than do men :) ), but a fair amount about nuclear power, I offer this:

    Assuming nuclear power plants are a source of radiation and radioactive contamination (which they are), and assuming more or less random distribution of nuclear power plants (which they aren't), then "mid point between two nuclear power plants" is a higher breast cancer risk only if breast cancer risk is lowered in the presence of low-level readioactivity/contamination. By any objective measure, levels of radioactivity/contamination from nuclear power plants are higher near one power plant than (relatively) far from two power plants. Midpoint between two power plants is about as safe as it gets, unless your definition of "mid point between" is "between two reactor vessels at the same site".

  • Re:Factor Analysis (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mellon ( 7048 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2002 @12:10PM (#3849997) Homepage
    What many diet proponents ignore is that people are different. What works for one person won't work for another. My wife has completely different nutritional needs than I do.

    If exercising in the gym isn't helping you, you may be a person who responds better to aerobic exercise. Try rollerblading or bicycling. The bad news is that, at least for me, it takes real dedication to make a dent in my standard body pattern - I have to do ~1h of aerobics almost every day to lose weight. Some people might not be willing or able to dedicate that much time to the process (I find that I can't generally find the time, frankly).

    So the point is, if you want to do it, try some other patterns and see if they work better for you. If you're satisfied with what you've got going now, don't worry about it - it sounds like you're getting a pretty healthy result.

"Here's something to think about: How come you never see a headline like `Psychic Wins Lottery.'" -- Comedian Jay Leno

Working...