No wonder we’re in trouble!

(Alec) #1

I’ve just spent 3 hours listening to the 3 Q&A sessions at the Swiss conference on “FOOD FOR THOUGHT: THE SCIENCE AND POLITICS OF NUTRITION”. I am pretty sure @richard attended, and so did a few of our low carb advocates such as Nina, Zoe and Gary. They were on panels rather than being sole presenters.

What amazed me was the standard of debate: frankly it was bloody awful. Maybe I am biassed, but the vast majority of the non-LC panellists were rambling idiots that said absolutely nothing, and very often just didn’t answer the questions they were asked. The vast majority of questioners were just grandstanding, and not interested in asking a real question.

Did the debate get into anything even vaguely interesting? Nope, absolutely not. Was there anything of any substance that was agreed upon? Nope. Was there any listening going on? Nope. Was there any interest in a real debate and exploration of new ways to get better results? Nope.

What a waste of time. Very very pitiful, and very very disappointing.

(Brian) #2

The “AND POLITICS” part should be a big clue.

Food and politics are pretty strange bedfellows.

(Mark Rhodes) #3

I thought that in the end there was consensus that dietary fat and in particular saturated fat had no bearing on CVD which was a major hurdle!

(Karen) #4

Baby steps, and some people can actually maintain health and thinness on, say, vegan diets.

K

(Mark Rhodes) #5

RIGHT! The Vegan community must address how the carnivore, keto and LCHF people are establishing wellness and obesity. These communities on the other hand need to address the criticism from the vegetarians and vegans who also produce top notch athletes and in some cases some pretty spectacular results.

In this regard I think both Ted Naiman and Ben Bikman are leading advocates of seeing protein as a lever between the two other macros. The worse case scenario then would be the ZONE 30-30-40… one, it seems, would do well to either eliminate fat or carbs but never does well doing both.

(Karen) #6

Hmmmm good point. Vegans and keto advocates both want thinness and health. No point in righteousness, and posturing.

K

#7

I do believe there was the declaration that fat was no longer a villain. For more detail go to Nina’s health coalition and see her posts

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #8

Yes, but they’re so much fun! :grinning:

#9

Hey guys - in my know-it-all way, I’m coming to the following conclusions:

  • Keto and Plant-Based Whole Food (vegan) are similar in that they avoid highly processed carbs and added sugars.
  • Vegans virtually eliminate fat and derive energy from carbs
  • Ketonians virtually eliminate carbs and derive energy from fat
  • Ketonians realize additional fringe benefits of low inflammation, raised HDL, increased mental clarity, bonk-proof athletic performance, lower sleep requirements, better skin, and not being frizzy-haired vegan twits.

I’m thinking it’s a pretty accurate model of reality – what do you think?

#10

I think the vegans are a product of there own making, how can you blame them when there diet stops the brain from functioning well. And the SAD got them started down the wrong path.

(Alec) #11

Have you listened to any of the Q&As? There most certainly was not any consensus on anything, and certainly not on saturated fat. There may have been a declaration like that by the Chair, but this did not reflect the debate at all. Go and listen. See what you think. Expect to be bored and frustrated. :rage::rage::rage:

#12

I agree the high carb twits remained un changed

(Karen) #13

A person convinced against their will,
is of the same opinion still.

K