Dispelling nutrition myths, ranting, and occasionally, raving


3 Comments

Don’t eat this, not that!

Screen Shot 2017-10-23 at 7.03.52 PM.png

Ever notice the proliferation of magazine articles telling you what to eat instead of something else? It’s almost always one crappy food versus another somewhat less crappy (but much less desirable) food so that you’re left feeling guilty if you choose the “not that” and resentful if you choose the “eat this”. And evidently people eat this shit up because I see articles with some variation of this format pretty much weekly (and I don’t even read magazines). There’s even a whole website devoted to the premise with actual books you can buy. Yes, people will pay money to have people tell them what to eat but heaven forbid the government try to simply make it easier for them to make healthier choices.

Despite their “no-diet weight loss solution!” twitter bio, it seems to me that the “eat this, not that!” is all about restriction and food selection based purely on calories. Their website is literally a compendium of terrible trendy nutrition and fitness click-bait. You’ve got everything from “20 ways to boost your metabolism” to “how to lose weight while doing every day tasks” to the following header:

Screen Shot 2017-10-23 at 7.36.04 PM

Oh okay, that sure sounds like a “no-diet weight loss solution”. I mean, at least make the effort to not put the freaking D-word in there if “no-diet” is your shtick.

I spent sometime the other evening scrolling through their twitter feed and I’m convinced that much of what they post is sponsored content. They’ve got things like Dunkin’ Donuts vs Krispy Kreme, fat burning supplements that actually work, how to eat McDonald’s fries without damaging your body, the best and worst Subway sandwiches, almond milk is bad (no protein) but drink this brand not that brand (even though they both only have 1 gram of protein per cup), yay Starbucks (for – I kid you not – having nut “milk” options) but also boo Starbucks (for having high calorie baked goods). Alongside these there’s also lots of your standard: drink more wine, eat more coconut oil, buy these overpriced so-called paleo superfood snacks.

How about we stop shoving shame-laden food down people’s throats and instead promote healthful choices, ways to get people in the kitchen, and the pleasure of eating.

Advertisements


7 Comments

The harm in fad diets

Many of us roll our eyes when we hear about people on fad diets. I think that most of us think, “oh well, it’s not doing them any harm. Let it run its course”. But what if these diets are doing people harm?  I’m not about fear mongering, you know this. Many of these trendy diets can be safe and healthy when followed properly. However, what about when they’re not? There is reasonable risk of deficiencies that could cause some degree of harm at worst, and at best prevent the adherents from attaining optimal health.

What’s the harm in a low-carb or gluten-free or paleo diet?

I’m lumping these two in together even though they’re not strictly the same, although it seems that they frequently go hand-in-hand. Here the risk lies in B vitamin deficiency. Yes, many B vitamins are available from animal foods. However, folic acid (which I blogged about a few weeks ago) was added to refined flour and cereals as a public health measure to prevent neural tube defects during pregnancy in 1998 (1). Eliminating grains from the diet may lead to increased risk of spina bifida, and other neural tube defects, in infants of mothers following these diets. It’s recommended that all women of childbearing age take a multivitamin containing 400 mcg of folic acid daily. Women who are following the above diets should be sure to follow this recommendation. The crucial window for neural tube formation is within the first 21-28 days of pregnancy. This means that if you wait to start taking a prenatal multivitamin once you find out you’re pregnant you may have already missed this window.

What’s the harm in a vegan diet?

While touted as one of the healthiest diets, a vegan diet can easily be deficient in essential nutrients. As with the low-carb diets above, a vegan diet may be low in some B vitamins. In this case, vitamin B12 is more likely to be the B vitamin of concern than is folic acid.

Vitamin B12 is important for many reasons. We need B12 for blood cell formation, nerve function, and brain function.

Vitamin D is also a concern in vegan diets as it’s primarily found in milk, fish, and eggs. During the winter months it’s difficult for most of us, vegans and non-vegans alike, to get enough vitamin D from food alone.

What’s the harm in a low-sodium diet?

This isn’t even so much a risk of low-sodium diet but of a diet that eschews table salt in particular. Now that sea salt is the salt selection of foodies and many of us are avoiding salt shakers there is potential for insufficient iodine consumption. Table salt is fortified with iodine, sea salt is not.

Iodine deficiency during pregnancy can result in poor mental development. Iodine is important in thyroid function and deficiency may result in the development of a goiter.

Now, to be fair, when consideration of balance, variety, and nutrients is taken into consideration all of these diets may be healthy. I think that it’s also worth mentioning that the average Western diet is probably less nutritious than all of the above diets. Most people consume too few vegetables and fruits, too much sodium, sugar, and fat. Most of us, even those of us consuming relatively healthy diets, don’t get enough potassium, vitamin D, magnesium, and fibre. While the focus should definitely be on whole food, it’s worth considering what nutrients your diet may be low in and making an effort to consume more foods rich in those nutrients or even considering taking a supplement if you’re finding it hard to meet your nutrient needs through food alone.


Leave a comment

Follow Friday: All of the low-carb diet blogs

url

When the news about the new “low-carb diet is the best long-term weight loss diet” came out I fleetingly considered writing about it. In the moment that I took to think about it, pretty much everyone else had covered it. So… Rather than reinvent the wheel. Here are some links to posts that say pretty much everything I would have said (and then some):

James Fell on Six Pack Abs: New Study: What is low carb good for

Karmal Patel on Examine.com: Is low-carb really the best weight loss diet?

Yoni Freedhoff on Weighty Matters: What I actually learned by reading that low-carb is best study

Julia Belluz on Vox: The one thing you need to know about weight loss and diet studies

There’s more, but that’s probably more than enough reading for now. I’m off to The Canteen for a sandwich. See you Monday!

 


11 Comments

The “real food” fallacy

url

All of a sudden, it seems that Zoe Harcombe is everywhere. She was providing ludicrous nutrition advice for sufferers of yeast infections (thanks @RD_Catherine for the link). Sorry y’all yoghurt won’t cure yeast infections. Yes, choosing a yoghurt with probiotics is great for overall health but it’s more because of the by-products produced by the bacteria (e.g. B vitamins) than because of the bacteria themselves. Unfortunately, most of the bacteria in yoghurt will not survive your stomach acid.

What I really want to address though, is her popular article in the Daily Mail (thanks to @ERHWG for sharing the article and her rage): Diets Make Us Fat. The Solution is Simple. The basic premise is that we need to eat “real food” as opposed to fake  “manufactured food”. Calories don’t matter, and we shouldn’t be counting them. All that matters is eating “real food”.

But what is “real food”? I don’t think you’ll find many dietitians who disagree with the importance of cooking and eating more vegetables, fruits, and minimally processed foods for overall health and weight loss. However, I don’t think the division between “real” and “fake” food is particularly useful. Nor is the vilification of whole grains. Grocery shopping is complicated enough and people are hard-pressed for time. Making them feel guilty for buying anything in a package is not going to help them to adopt healthier habits.

It’s also possible to be over weight when consuming a “real food” diet. You know why? Because calories do matter. I’ve met plenty of people who are over weight who eat very healthy diets. Simply telling people that if they eat “real food” is not going to solve the obesity crisis. If I was over weight and someone gave me this advice I would be insulted. Not everyone who is over weight or obese is subsisting on a diet of big macs and kit kat bars. Consuming more calories than we need, regardless of the source, will result in weight gain.

Finally, the reason that diets don’t work is because they’re short-term fixes. Not because people are necessarily consuming the wrong types of foods or because they’re counting calories. The problem with diets is that they have an end date. They are not sustainable lifestyle changes. The other reason that they don’t work is because our food system is broken. Our environment is structured such that the unhealthy choice is the easiest choice and it’s a lot of work not to be over weight. Placing the onus on the individual and suggesting that if they only stopped counting calories and ate “real food” doesn’t even come close to addressing the true societal roots of the obesity epidemic.


1 Comment

Reader’s Digest new fat-melting diet

I was pretty excited when one of the doctors at my temp job gave me the latest copy of Reader’s Digest to trash it. I know that he intended for me to throw it out but I wanted to trash it figuratively first. How could I not, with a headline like this?

The article touts the weight loss of Reader’s Digest staff after being on the diet for three weeks. The article states: “We lost 151 pounds in 3 weeks!” I’m not even going to get into how poorly the staff at the magazine must normally eat if they all saw double-digit weight loss over the course of 21 days. The fact that it’s a 21-day plan is a concern to me. It reeks of the dreaded “D” word. I wouldn’t be surprised if most, if not all, of the staff had regained the weight by the time the issue hit the newsstands. Sorry, but we all know that diets don’t work. If you want to see sustainable results, you need to makes sustainable changes.

Continuing on, there’s information on “13 essential fat releasers”. Supposedly the calories in these foods actually “thwart your body’s desire to hold on to fat, so you lose weight quickly and without hunger.” I’m not going to get into specifics on each of these foods as that would just take up way too much space and time. Suffice to say, there are no magical fat-loss foods. All of the foods mentioned in the article are certainly healthy choices. However, the benefits that the staff saw from them were not due to their magical properties. They were a result of switching from calorie-dense, nutrient-poor eating habits. One staffer is quoted as saying: “I used to inhale four cheeseburgers in two minutes. Now I’m satisfied by a 35-calorie piece of cheese.” Do we really think his 26-pound weight loss was due to special fat-releasers in the foods he ate? I’m fairly confident that his weight loss was due to the fact that he had a lot of extra weight to lose to being with and from switching from a very high calorie diet to healthier, lower calorie foods in smaller portions, not as a result of magical fat-releasers.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but there’s no magic foods you can eat to “release fat”. If you want to lose weight (and keep it off) you’re going to need to do some work.