Tiedän, että sinulle tuottaa vaikeuksia lukea lähdeviitteitä, vaikka niitä pyydätkin ja vaikka niitä sinulle aina tarjotaan. Tässä on kuitenkin pari mielenkiintoista artikkelia. Ne eivät suinkaan ole tieteellisiä sellaisia, joten niiden lukeminen on helpompaa, mutta ne kuitenkin ovat ihan arvovaltaisista lähteistä, joten et pysty kyseenalaistamaan niitä. Toivottavasti tämä edes hiukan avaa silmiäsi, koska näytät ne ummistaneen sinulle tarjotuista totuuksista ja faktoista.
Tässä ensimmäinen (kahdesta):
"What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F04E2D61F3EF934A35754C0A9649C8B63
Joitakin lainauksia artikkelista:
"there are plenty of reasons to suggest that the low-fat-is-good-health hypothesis has now effectively failed the test of time. In particular, that we are in the midst of an obesity epidemic that started around the early 1980's, and that this was coincident with the rise of the low-fat dogma. (Type 2 diabetes, the most common form of the disease, also rose significantly through this period.)"
"...because the public health authorities told us unwittingly, but with the best of intentions, to eat precisely those foods that would make us fat, and we did." (onkohan puska kuulolla...)
"''Grain products and concentrated sugars were essentially absent from human nutrition until the invention of agriculture,'' Ludwig says, ''which was only 10,000 years ago.''"
"In the intervening years, the N.I.H. spent several hundred million dollars trying to demonstrate a connection between eating fat and getting heart disease and, despite what we might think, it failed."
"Fat was removed from foods like cookies, chips and yogurt. The problem was, it had to be replaced with something as tasty and pleasurable to the palate, which meant some form of sugar, often high-fructose corn syrup."
"What this means is that even saturated fats -- a k a, the bad fats -- are not nearly as deleterious as you would think. True, they will elevate your bad cholesterol, but they will also elevate your good cholesterol. In other words, it's a virtual wash. As Willett explained to me, you will gain little to no health benefit by giving up milk, butter and cheese and eating bagels instead."
"If you work out the numbers, you come to the surreal conclusion that you can eat lard straight from the can and conceivably reduce your risk of heart disease."
"Instead we ate more starches and refined carbohydrates, because calorie for calorie, these are the cheapest nutrients for the food industry to produce, and they can be sold at the highest profit"
"The answer provided by Endocrinology 101 is that we are simply hungrier than we were in the 70's, and the reason is physiological more than psychological. In this case, the salient factor -- ignored in the pursuit of fat and its effect on cholesterol -- is how carbohydrates affect blood sugar and insulin."
"Veech calls ketones ''magic'' and has shown that both the heart and brain run 25 percent more efficiently on ketones than on blood sugar."
"Though researchers are hesitant to agree with this, it does suggest that heart-disease risk could actually be reduced when fat is added back into the diet and starches and refined carbohydrates are removed. ''I think when this stuff gets to be recognized,'' Stunkard says, ''it's going to really shake up a lot of thinking about obesity and metabolism.''"
Siinä oli ensimmäinen, luitko sen? Vielä olisi toinen:
"Dirty Secrets of the Food Processing Industry"
http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/dirty-secrets.html
Tiedäthän, kannustamalla vähärasvaiseen ruokaan, kannustat samalla mm. teollisesti valmistettuihin "kevyt"-ruokiin yms. Tässäpä vähän mm. niistä.
En lainaa tekstiä, jotta yllätysmomentti säilyisi, mutta ruokahalun kohottamiseksi voisin mainita, että siellä on kerrottu mm. mielenkiintoisista eläinkokeista, murolaatikon terveellisyydestä sisältöönsä verrattuna, maidon prosessoinnista (mm. käyttämäsi "terveellisemmän" ykkösmaidon), lisäaineista, kasvisöljyjen prosessoinnista jne.
Et sinä tietenkään näitä lue, mutta etpähän pääse sanomaan, etteikö sinulle lähdeviitteitä ole annettu.
Tässä ensimmäinen (kahdesta):
"What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?"
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F04E2D61F3EF934A35754C0A9649C8B63
Joitakin lainauksia artikkelista:
"there are plenty of reasons to suggest that the low-fat-is-good-health hypothesis has now effectively failed the test of time. In particular, that we are in the midst of an obesity epidemic that started around the early 1980's, and that this was coincident with the rise of the low-fat dogma. (Type 2 diabetes, the most common form of the disease, also rose significantly through this period.)"
"...because the public health authorities told us unwittingly, but with the best of intentions, to eat precisely those foods that would make us fat, and we did." (onkohan puska kuulolla...)
"''Grain products and concentrated sugars were essentially absent from human nutrition until the invention of agriculture,'' Ludwig says, ''which was only 10,000 years ago.''"
"In the intervening years, the N.I.H. spent several hundred million dollars trying to demonstrate a connection between eating fat and getting heart disease and, despite what we might think, it failed."
"Fat was removed from foods like cookies, chips and yogurt. The problem was, it had to be replaced with something as tasty and pleasurable to the palate, which meant some form of sugar, often high-fructose corn syrup."
"What this means is that even saturated fats -- a k a, the bad fats -- are not nearly as deleterious as you would think. True, they will elevate your bad cholesterol, but they will also elevate your good cholesterol. In other words, it's a virtual wash. As Willett explained to me, you will gain little to no health benefit by giving up milk, butter and cheese and eating bagels instead."
"If you work out the numbers, you come to the surreal conclusion that you can eat lard straight from the can and conceivably reduce your risk of heart disease."
"Instead we ate more starches and refined carbohydrates, because calorie for calorie, these are the cheapest nutrients for the food industry to produce, and they can be sold at the highest profit"
"The answer provided by Endocrinology 101 is that we are simply hungrier than we were in the 70's, and the reason is physiological more than psychological. In this case, the salient factor -- ignored in the pursuit of fat and its effect on cholesterol -- is how carbohydrates affect blood sugar and insulin."
"Veech calls ketones ''magic'' and has shown that both the heart and brain run 25 percent more efficiently on ketones than on blood sugar."
"Though researchers are hesitant to agree with this, it does suggest that heart-disease risk could actually be reduced when fat is added back into the diet and starches and refined carbohydrates are removed. ''I think when this stuff gets to be recognized,'' Stunkard says, ''it's going to really shake up a lot of thinking about obesity and metabolism.''"
Siinä oli ensimmäinen, luitko sen? Vielä olisi toinen:
"Dirty Secrets of the Food Processing Industry"
http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/dirty-secrets.html
Tiedäthän, kannustamalla vähärasvaiseen ruokaan, kannustat samalla mm. teollisesti valmistettuihin "kevyt"-ruokiin yms. Tässäpä vähän mm. niistä.
En lainaa tekstiä, jotta yllätysmomentti säilyisi, mutta ruokahalun kohottamiseksi voisin mainita, että siellä on kerrottu mm. mielenkiintoisista eläinkokeista, murolaatikon terveellisyydestä sisältöönsä verrattuna, maidon prosessoinnista (mm. käyttämäsi "terveellisemmän" ykkösmaidon), lisäaineista, kasvisöljyjen prosessoinnista jne.
Et sinä tietenkään näitä lue, mutta etpähän pääse sanomaan, etteikö sinulle lähdeviitteitä ole annettu.
Vastaukset 4
Vanhimmat
nuo pari viimeistä kappaletta. Ostan ykkösmaitoa varmaan n. 5l vuodessa, ja käytän sen ruoanlaittoon. Muroja en syö koskaan. En myöskään koskaan osta eineksiä, sillä tykkään ruoanlaitosta, ja täällä meillä on hyvät ainekset. Olen allerginen, joten pyrin välttämään myös lisäaineita.
P.S. Kirjoituksesi olisi helpompi ottaa vakavasti, jos yrittäisit edes tavata nikkini oikein.
töiden lomassa.
Ihan hyvä artikkeli, joskin toivottoman vanha (2002). Sen jälkeen on NYT:ssa ollut lukuisia sen sisällön vastaisia artikkeleita. Minulle tulee ko. lehti, joten olen asiasta enemmän kuin tietoinen.
"lukuisia sen sisällön vastaisia artikkeleita"
voi voi skäripö ... sinut on niin helppo saada valheesta kiinni. Katsoin läpi lehden sivuja ja löysin monta vhh-myönteistä mutten yhtä vhh-vastaista artikkelia.
eikä soisi löytävänsä. Mikä se on?