Low Carb High Fat...
Tosh
Veteran
It's not a fad, it's not even a diet (as in you don't need to restrict portion sizes or count calories), but Mrs Tosh and myself both started doing this in January and I dropped the extra 15 -20 lbs I was carrying very easily (apart from sugar cravings).
Anyway, if anyone is struggling with weight, or even with diabetes, take a look at this:
The lady speaking is called Sarah Hallsberg and she's a doc who specialises in obesity; it is about Type II diabetes, but the Ted Talk also explains how the 'diet' works.
Neither Mrs Tosh or I need to lose weight, but we're continuing to eat this way because we feel much healthier for it.
You can do this as a vegan/vegetarian too, though you may eat more incidental carbs than what carnivores do.
Just thought I'd share! :-)
Comments
I simply HAVE to overcome my aversion to squeaky Amerian voices 'selling' me things. It's a prejudice I need to overcome. I'm serious.
e here in the UK broadcast so many USA-based advertisements (Why? Why?!? FFS, WHY?!!? I mean, how many British adverts are run in the USA?!)
Most of the adverts are selling 'be perfect, fast!!' products (exercise machines, miraculous hair restorers, perfect shavers - there's a contrast! - and food supplements or foodstuffs), and the music, loud, enthusiastic and scripted testimonies grate on my ears.
So while I am 100% certain what this woman is saying, is both valid and valuable - I couldn't listen to more than 3 minutes before getting the (I'm certain, false) impression that she was selling me a ground-breaking, never-been-done before, miracle reversal of a global malady that is affecting millions, as we speak.
And it's something an eminent, popular and very well-known Doctor in the UK, has advocated for a number of years, now. Cut the carbs, increase the (good) fats.
Watch the Omega 6 though, because it can overwhelm the Omega-3 oils.
https://chriskresser.com/how-too-much-omega-6-and-not-enough-omega-3-is-making-us-sick/
I apologise @Tosh; I wasn't dissing the message, just the presentation. Like I said, it's a hurdle I have to overcome....
I mostly stick to low carb high fat. Lots of avocados and nuts, lol. I wish I didn't see so many people use it as a license to live on bacon though. I have a friend who has been LCHF for 2 years now, and she and her family eat 8-10 pounds of bacon a week. Focusing so much on any one item is always a recipe for disaster. They eat nothing but meat and cheese, and have no focus at all on veggies which is a shame. She thinks they are "too high carb." So she's just an example of one of many who take it to an extreme and lose most of the benefits other than the weight loss.
I find it challenging when I run or bike to stay within my normal daily goal (I track, but just as a vague idea to keep me accountable more than anything, I don't eat to calories or macros). On average, I eat about 50g of carbs a day. But on days my exercise is longer, I have to have more or I feel miserable. I know people who do Maffetone where they do LCHF and low heart rate exercise, but I don't have the patience, or the time outside because of winter, to do that kind of training, lol. So I just eat more carbs when I know my exercise will be up there. Zach Bitter is an interesting story to read about online. He has set 24 hour running records while being LCHF. But, what "low carb" means to him is not the same as us mortals, he still eat more than 100 grams a day. But the ratio to total calories is still quite low. He just needs to eat a lot, LOL.
Even for most people I think they'd benefit huge from giving up processed carbs. The whole lot of them. Most of them would find their carb level drop naturally. Having a son who is a type 1 diabetic, we stick to pretty low carb all the time. He eats school lunch as a "treat" on occasion, and UGH. The amount of carbs that they give kids is ridiculous. Because of his diabetes, I know the carb count of about every food you can imagine, and it's horrifying to see what the average person fills their weekly shopping cart with.
I saw that TT video a few months ago, thought it was good.
Since then, I've run across a fellow on YT - "Butter Bob" - he's really good on the LCHF schtick. I've watched most of his videos - he originally only posted one or two videos on YT for immediate fam and friends, having no idea it would really take off. When I very first tried LCHF, I ate too much bacon and other things and made me feel a little queasy, so cut back on some stuff. But he has what I call masterful information - his research is deep on many things, including the history of doctors, nutritionists, scientists etc. who supported and experimented with LCHF.
Hey @federica - Do you remember a few decades ago (when I was a teen), a commercial where the woman had a British accent and she kept pronouncing "cottage cheese" unlike any other? It sticks in my mind to this day! I thought she was gonna turn her throat inside out trying to say it.
Being in the UK, I'm not sure what advert you're referring to, because all British adverts sound... well, British, to me.....! Sadly, my teens were 40 - 50 years ago.... much of what happened during those years is either totally forgotten, or a bit of a blur....!
@Tosh, to make amends (!) I'm posting this article, which appeared in a daily paper last year, which backs your lady Doc 100%....
It's okay; she has a screechy voice; I like it though, and her enthusiasm.
No amends needed, Fede.
The strong takeaway from this talk is to avoid highly processed food that has been stripped of all fiber and micro-nutrients. Carbohydrates are locked in the fiber of vegetables and as starches in grains. The key here is that they are polysaccharides or complex carbohydrates, which means they are low G.I. and shouldn't result in an insulin spike. Fruits- although containing essential fiber- contain simpler carbohydrates, which can result in the problem outlined in the talk (without moderation).
Another thing to note is that calorie intake is a factor. While biology takes a front seat, physics should not be completely ruled out here. So while some foods are high carb, they are low calorie and also low G.I. Ergo, you can not just remove sugars from your diet, rely on ketone bodies for energy and eat infinite cheezeburgers without health problems or potential weight gain.
Having a more nuanced knowledge of carbohydrates means we can avoid blanket statements, potentially leading to extremism and total 'carb' aversion. While the presentation was not categorically 'anti-carb' I do feel it required a tweak here and there for the undiscerning ear or eye.
One more thing, I am led to believe it was in 1977 USDA recommendations changed from LCHF to HCLF where in previous decades obesity was at the very least significantly mitigated.
Yes, we do it Phil Maffetone style too; 180 heart beats per minute minus your age. Mrs Tosh gets an extra 5 heart beats per minute because she's super human (or not human; she runs and wins ultra marathons).
We do all our long runs this way. It's good for injury prevention; we run our slow runs slowly which means we can run our fast runs fast; rather than running the slow too fast, meaning our legs are tired for our fast runs, which then get ran too slowly.
Fat adaption is excellent for endurance athletes.
We went through a stage of counting carbs, but stopped as it was a bit tedious. We just stick to eating lots of green-leafy veg mostly; they're our equivalent of a 'carb' these days.
And we eat a ton of eggs; we hard boil 12 to 15 a day and we get through them, no problems.
It's called a 'low carb' diet, not a 'no carb' diet, but like any way of eating, there's better and worse methods.
A vegan can eat nothing but Pringles (chips/crisps), and they'd still be Vegan, just not a very healthy one.
Yes, I eat two almost-hard 'boiled' eggs a day - around 14 a week (sometimes I have one and some cottage cheese.... All the previous talk of eggs being bad for you due to high cholesterol have basically been revoked and renounced as inaccurate. (I said 'boiled' but in fact I steam my eggs for 6 minutes. the flavour difference is subtle yet noticeable - and I have discovered that even the freshest eggs peel really easily when steamed!)
The 'magic' of a low carb diet is that it's a more satiating; you just don't feel as hungry as often and you naturally gravitate to eating less, ergo less calorific intake and subsequent weight loss (if that's what you're after).
And why can't you rely on ketone bodies for energy?
I thought that was the whole point?
Mrs Tosh eats this way not to lose weight, but because she's an endurance athlete and glycogen stores are limited to two-or-three hours (about 20 miles-ish) of running. Which isn't much cop if you're running 100 miles. After about 70 miles she finds her body starts rejecting food, especially sweet stuff (like energy gels). We've read some endurance athletes only eat about a quarter of what they used to need on ultra marathons; which is a huge advantage.
So fat-adapted athletes rely on fat-for-fuel which is almost infinite when compared to glycogen stores.
I estimate our carb intake to be around 20 grams a day, give or take 5 to 10 grams. I did used to measure them, but got bored with that.
It is all still at the experimental stage though; we've just been at it since November (though seriously since January); though we're finding it all positive so far.
We feel really healthy on it too; even my bowel movements are just brilliant (no smell); too much information I know, but really, what an improvement.
Apart from I'm still craving sugar (chocolate raisins mostly). I'm two weeks clean of chocolate at present, but feel a massive relapse coming on.
I've watched a few of his too; I like him. He reminds me of an A.A. Old Timer; they don't try to give deep philosophical advice, just practical and pragmatic stuff.
I agree @Tosh, it is an important distinction to make when attracting an audience. That said, Dr Hallsberg mentions zero level requirement for carb intake around 7:30, and a factor called gluconeogenesis. So allegedly we can create glucose from non-carb sources.
I can't currently answer your question about ketone bodies per se, I don't know of any long term studies of ketosis on human subjects off the top of my head, but a cursory reading indicates constipation and an increase in cholesterol and triglycerides. What I should have said was that it probably isn't the best idea in the world to do so.
I'm assuming you're a medical practitioner, and I respect that, but I do think you're wrong on the basis that there are a lot of studies that show there's many benefits to LCHF.
There's 23 randomised controlled trials here:
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
I concede there's no end-point studies, not yet anyway, though for the standard high-carb diet, we know the end-point is a world-wide obesity epidemic.
I'll also add, we feel great; our energy levels have evened out (no sleepiness after a meal), we're able to train hard, we just feel better on this diet. We have taken breaks from it, like over Christmas, and we were pleased to get back onto LCHF after that.
From an experiential point of view, it feels healthier (which I understand doesn't mean it is).
Butter makes your pants fall off... Yee-haw, pass the lard!!
(I know, I know, there's more to it than that.....!)
Just eat sensible portions of a variety of food groups.. Make most of your diet vegetables.
It's not friggin rocket science!
I'm not good at moderation; I never have been. Like many alkies, I'm all or nothing.
LCHF is my middleway.
But for a huge portion of the world the 'move more eat less' thing isn't doable. If it were they'd be doing it.
Sweden is the first country to officially change it's dietary guidelines to eating more fat and they've managed to halt their ever growing obesity crisis over there.
This Swedish doc is quite a funny guy; he explains it better than I:
I think we've known it all along though....
Fine words butter no parsnips.
Buttering someone up
butter your bread on both sides
Butter wouldn't melt....
Bread and butter letter
Knowing which side your bread is buttered
Hot knife through butter
earning one's bread and butter
Things just aren't the same with margarine....
Do you peeps across the pond refer to margarine as 'oleo' sometimes?
The Munchkins used to sing about it "o-le-oh, o-LE-oh!"
(Why do these things come to my mind?)
We call it 'marge'.
As a child I remember we did use a brand of marge called 'oleo'; it came in a large circular tub.
But it was still called marge where I come from (Geordie-land), however, strangely enough we'd still 'butter our bread' with it.
Did you 'oleo' your bread, or butter it with oleo?
Yeah, I understand @Tosh - can be a bit that way myself at times.
Nice to see you back here btw @Tosh - the Toon had a good win the other night
It's mostly root veggies that are "too high carb". And corn, which I guess technically is a grain.
Yeah, @Tosh, it's funny about what gets called a "fad". It turns out that it was calorie-counting that was the fad. Before then, dieters were told to avoid, or cut back on, "starches" (carbs), but then someone tried to sell the medical community and consumers on the idea that "a calorie is a calorie", i.e. that all calories are the same, and all you have to do to lose weight is cut back and count the calories you eat. And they were very successful at selling everyone on that theory.
However, endocrinologists know better. They know that certain foods cause a big insulin response, and others stabilize insulin, and still others cause a very small insulin reaction. And excess insulin in the system causes the body to build fat.
That's pretty much it, in a nutshell. The only caveat I would offer is that women don't seem to do as well with the high-fat part. Or maybe it's the type of fat; men are able to lose weight even if they eat bacon, fatty meat, and whipped cream for dessert, while women can't go to that extreme, that's my observation after talking to other women about it, and noting my own body's reaction.
I'd also caution people who think that a low-carb weight-loss diet is just a temporary regimen. The fact is that once you begin eating that way, once you reach your goal, you can't ever go completely back to eating higher-carb foods in the proportions you did before. If you do, you'll gain the weight back. You can gradually add some carbs back in, but you still have to maintain a certain higher-protein ratio to carbs. This can make international travel a bit awkward, because most of the world's people eat starchy meals. Even in Europe, the Germanic peoples tend to be big on potatoes and bread along with their meat or cheese. Eating the higher amounts of protein the diet requires, and cutting out most carbs, is expensive.
However, it's definitely a very effective weight-loss strategy; when combined with regular weight-bearing exercise and enough protein in the diet, you get very lean very fast.
Yes @Dakini , many erudite and well-established experts do emphasises the types of carbs which are detrimental, and that fats have to be 'balanced'... even Butter Bob emphasises this in his subsequent videos.
I mentioned earlier the ratio of Omega 3 to Omega 6 fats, and the need to eat those in the right proportions, so while I think it may be tempting to go and buy a bucket of KFC and only one small bag of fries, or a rack of Buffalo Grill ribs but only a tiny baked potato, you have to look at the bigger picture... and eat the coleslaw.
haha! Yes, and thanks for posting about the Omega 3/6 balance issue. I'm going to do some more research on that.
start with the links in my previous post... I think it was the 2nd or 3rd.... very interesting.
Will do, tomorrow (it's very late on this side of the pond right now). I guess that issue is why some people recommend supplementing with salmon oil capsules. Do you have Olsen's Norwegian Salmon Oil gels on your side of the pond?
To illustrate @Dakini's point regarding calorific count, and how misleading data so far, has been, I did a quick comparison Total calories (according to 'myfitnesspal'):
This was my breakfast today:
50g smoked salmon
2 HB eggs
1 slice gouda cheese
50g tinned asparagus
1oz lactofermented onions
2 slices of Finn Crisp crackers, with a smear of butter on each.
Total calories consumed: 453
What one might term a traditional English quick breakfast:
2 slices wholemeal toast with margarine
1 fried egg (in vegetable oil)
2 rashers of streaky bacon
Total Calories contained: 439
It's the margarine and vegetable oil which are the 'detrimental' fats, here.... Even though the calorific count is lower, the Omega 6 is what has to be watched.
Calorie is calorie is calorie.
Low carb/high calorie = weight gain.
High carb/low calorie = weight loss.
How much you eat matters, not how much carbs you eat.
@techie....? You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Seriously.
You obviously have read nothing we have linked to, or researched the matter yourself....
@techie that is no longer accepted as valid. Calories are not created equal. Your body responds vastly differently to 500 calories of greens than to 500 calories of oreos than to 500 calories of steak. Every single detail matters because your cells treat them all differently. Calories in versus calories out is far too simplified.
It's simply not true that low carb but high calorie results in weight gain. It's 100% untrue. because your body burns fat differently than carbs and more efficiently. The body has to process and change carbs to use them. It does not have to do so with fat. One can eat the same # of calories, but the difference in how many carbs you eat will result in weight gain or loss.
People absolutely can live on a ketone burning diet for a very long time. Many populations of people have in the past had little to no access to vast carbs. Our brains need them, but only a small amount.
@Tosh I can't even walk around our area and keep my heart rate in the 130s, lol. I know several people who use that method, and I find is fascinating. It makes total sense. But my running is limited to May-November because I run only trails and the snow takes over most of them. Plus I just don't have it in me to dress necessary to run in -40F weather! I don't run to race though, I just run for fun, and when it's not fun, I don't do it. the amount of time it would take (from what I understand in reading and what others experienced) I would have to mostly be able to keep up year round because it would take months to get to the point by body has adapted and then it would be months before I was out running again. I just is too hard on my bad knee to run on pavement/cement or the treadmill (not to mention mind-numbing, as I run to be outside and in nature). I did take up fat biking this winter to get out more, so that has been interesting, lol. I volunteer at one of the big ultras in my area. Love them. I just don't have the time to train for one, having kids at home. Also, I don't want it bad enough to do what I'd have to do to run one, lol. But ultra runners are a special group of people for sure.
Very interesting experiment, see below:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
@techie Yes, I've heard about it and similar ones. But everyone has a unique metabolism and body that responds differently to loads of various things. If he kept up the twinkie diet for years, he wouldn't be very healthy, would he? Eventually his metabolism would struggle and his body would no longer respond as expected. Which is the boat millions of westerners are in. There is a ton of literature out there now in the medical study world. It's easy to find if you doubt our claims. It may be true for you that you can cut calories and eat whatever else as long as you stay within a calorie goal and lose weight. But it is not the case for many, many people.
Someone who is healthy isn't going to suffer a lot of ill effects from a month of twinkie eating. But it is in no way representative of several years or a lifetime. Nor is is representative of everyone. I'm not lying to you when I tell you what I observed. I have been tracking my nutrition and fitness for most of my adult life, and experimenting a lot along the way. I can tell you what makes me lose and gain weight. And that is fact for me, no matter what the twinkie professor found. And it's fact for a lot of other people. They aren't delusional. You can also watch multiple documentaries about how people's health changed when eating a poor diet, such as the infamous Super Size Me. Diets high in processed foods are dangerous. In so many ways.
Low Carb High Fat...
High fat? I cant belive its good for you to eat a lot of butter, bacon and read meat, your colestrol will increase and your blood pressure aswell.
Dash diet is ranked nr 1, 7 years in row by nutrition experts.
its a diet easy to follow they say:
• Fat-free or low-fat milk and dairy foods
• Fruits and vegetables
• Whole grains
• Lean meat, fish, poultry
• Nuts, seeds, and legumes (dried beans and peas)
low consumption of sodium
A calorie isn't just a calorie; a calorie is a calorie + information.
Calories come from carbs, protein and fat and your body, depending on what kind of calorie it is, will treat it in different ways.
If it's a carb calorie it will spike your insulin and insulin is your fat storage hormone.
My (basic) understanding is that your body will not burn body fat when insulin is in your system. And as we age we become more and more insulin resistant (well us fat ones do) and our bodies have to produce more and more insulin to deal with the carbs. This is called insulin resistance; I think about a third of the USA is insulin resistant (that's like pre-pre diabetes).
So, by keeping carbs to a minimum you don't spike your insulin, you force your body to utilise fat as fuel. And because it's a more satisfying way of eating, you naturally gravitate to eating less.
That's my understanding, but there's a lot of science to back this up as well.
Let's say you require 2000 calories to maintain your current body weight.
Suppose you eat 2500 calories of low carb diet (500 cals above maintenance), what will happen?
Suppose you eat 1500 calories of high carb diet (500 cals below maintenance), what will happen?
I love a good maths problem.
It's a shame maths doesn't seem to be doing much for the world wide obesity epidemic.
Sweden is the only country in the world to have halted it's rising obesity rates; low carb high fat is extremely popular over there.
Maths isn't needed.
The 'fat is bad' for you is based on outdated and bad science.
Ancel Keys was one of the first to promote this myth when he observed fat blocked drains. He did a study called The Seven Country study and cherry picked his findings.
They also did stuff like feed rabbits a high fat diet and they all got heart disease. Rabbits produce all their own cholesterol, so adding yet more wasn't going to be good for them. And had they done the same experiment using dogs, they would've gotten a totally different result.
There is no evidence that fat is bad for you.
But I understand that we've had the 'fat is bad' drummed into us from an early age, while we're chugging down fruit juices, which were advertised as healthy, which is basically just sugar water (carbs).
It depends what is making up that calorific total, and for how long you maintain it, but generally speaking you will reduce bad cholesterol, draw sugar from your intake and convert it to Energy to fuel your muscles and you will almost certainly lose weight.
Carbohydrates are generally sugar bullets which if you can't absorb and use, will turn to fat, and make those who are Insulin-resistant more prone to diabetes II.
BtW, I have verifiable data to back this up....
next question?
(And try to make it one you've actually based on proper research, ok?)
Your answer indicates that you have understood neither science nor the question itself, for that matter. Sorry!
No, @techie it shows you refuse to look at more recent studies that are proving exactly this. I already told you I've experimented with that. I can gain weight on a 1500 calorie diet if I eat too many carbs. I've proven it with my records. I can lose weight on a 2200 calorie diet that is low carb. I've also proven this with my records. Regardless of whether you choose to believe me or not. And I'm not the only one. By far. It's all about how your body processes stuff, and carbs that are consumed but not used, are stored as fat. That is exactly part of the job that insulin does. Carbs burn hot and fast, and then get stored. Fat burns low and slow and is more consistent.
I can also tell you the exact effect what particular carbs have on blood sugar. Because we measure it all day, around the clock, on our diabetic son. Rises in blood sugar aren't good for anyone, diabetic or not. And if you live in a cycle of dealing with those blood sugar rises, it wreaks havoc on your hormonal system over the years, causing you to abnormally retain fat and be unable to recognize normal hunger cues. Stable blood sugars have been proven a million times over to be healthier for everyone.
@Namada no one is advocating living on animal fats. Most people who are successful with LCHF diets eat a lot of plant fats and a lot of nuts. They eat meat, yes, but most still do not live on bacon and steak. Also, butter has again been released from how much it's been demonized. When we replaced it with butter substitutes we introduced a whole other party of chemicals and awful oils for us. Cancer causing stuff.
Anyhow, I'm not arguing with either of you anymore. If you want to know, research it. There is tons and tons of research out there to support it. If you choose to be ignorant of it, that is your choice, but don't try to pretend you have all the answers when you haven't bother to update your education on the matter.
You're absolutely right. If I eat 10000 calories of low carb diet, I will lose weight. If I eat 1500 calories of high carb diet, I will gain weight.
Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the tip.
Is that what I said? No. There's no reason to be rude and arrogant.
And we all know what happens when a member starts being rude and arrogant, don't we?
@techie, I would urgently suggest that you stop, do some current research, and educate yourself regarding this issue.
Odd that when so many are telling you that you're incorrect, you're a lone sole voice insisting that you're right and everyone else is wrong.
There's a bit of a clue there, don't you think?
And please - cease with the rudeness and arrogance.
That's unacceptable.
It's not @techie's fault; we've had the 'fat is bad' for you and 'move more, eat less' since the late 70s, early 80s.
People are conditioned to just believe this as fact.
'Low Carb High Fat' just sounds mental to begin with.
It sounds like it's just another fad.
It also brings up connotations of bacon and cheese.
Dr Michael Mosely (he'll be known by the British members here) calls it the 'Blood sugar diet', because eating low carb high fat is a method to control your blood sugar. Or he calls it the 'traditional Mediterranean style diet' (which has nothing to do with pizza and pasta) which is also low carb high fat. The 'high fat' of LCHF tends to turn people off, but it's not exactly what you think it is (if you're thinking it's just bacon and cheese).
He gives a talk here titled "How to stay healthy and what the latest science tells us" which covers the above points, and more...
My alcoholic nature made sure I did a fair bit of research (internet based ahem) before embarking on this way of eating (it's not really a diet as such).
Yes, being mostly Buddhists here, we treat them with understanding, love and compassion (maybe the odd ban if they get too out of hand I suppose).
The odd sarky reply never hurts either.
Much.
This is a good review of multiple studies (with links to the actual studies in peer reviewed journals). #4 is specific to this conversation, along with some others.
https://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
The weight loss is more significant (often by twice as much) in low carb compared to low fat diets, especially when the low fat diet was calorie controlled. So in those studies, people eating more calories but more fat and low carb, lost more than twice as much weight as people on higher carb, low fat, calorie restricted diets. Triglycerides also drop dramatically in low carb diets versus higher carb ones, which is noted in all the studies that recorded that statistic.
@Tosh yes, thank you for the reminder. Education on this matter is still way behind even though it's been studied so many times in the past 15 years or so now. Medical science and government recommendations based on that science are very slow to translate to actual change here in the US. I don't know if other countries are better or not. My son is in 2nd grade (he's 8 years old) and the average hot lunch meal served by the school is 90-105 grams of carbs. Sugared chocolate milk is widely available (and most kids take 2-3 of them) and favored because it is low fat. It's sad. Fresh fruit and vegetables mostly don't exist. Nursing homes and hospitals are the same. 99% of the time our son takes lunch from home and his lunches average more like 20 grams, and he isn't tired and starving and crabby when he gets home.
Sweden is the 1st and only country to officially sanction LCHF and they've halted their obesity epidemic. The only western country to have done so (halt the ever rising numbers of obese).
They're quite a forward thinking and progressive country in general though.
As for the rest of us, there's lots of different agendas which makes change slow; there's the food industry and food lobbyists, there's nutritionists (they don't want to be wrong), there's the pharmaceutical companies (there's money to be made in keeping people sick), and probably more that don't spring to mind.
Oh, the behaviour of the sugar industry is being compared to the tobacco industry too.
And I'm aware that the last two paragraphs sound a bit tin-foil-hat conspiracy, but there's some truth in it, I'm sure.
OH there is. Here, nutritionist can be anyone. i could call myself one. But you need college to be a registered dietitian. But the program is designed and certified by the USDA and our government gets its nutrition information largely from lobbyists and the food industry scientists. It's crazy to me. It's quite amazing what you find in all those loops around our health, from what we eat, to preventative care, to acute care to insurance etc etc when you follow the money. None of it has anything to do with concern for our health, that's for sure. If I remember right, just last year some studies were thrown out after it was found that the sugar industry paid the scientists to come up with the right results. Crazy! I'll have to read up on Sweden some more, that's interesting.
I find all of it fascinating. I did a strict keto diet last spring and felt amazing, though I struggled with implementing it into my running some. Then we went on vacation and I had no control over our food choices (someone else paid for vacation) and fell off the wagon hard. I did a yoga program with a group and most went vegan, so I did that, and felt really good during that, too. So, it's been a conflict for me, lol. But I think I've got it down with the best of both worlds in that my plant intake is significantly more than animal products but still low carb, which seems to be what works best for me. I was super skeptical but after watching several friends soar past me with their weight loss and general health, I gave in. I was shocked at the difference in 30 days, which is when I really started delving into the research. Interesting stuff. Our bodies are so fascinating.