# Zoe Harcombe diet



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/the-knowledge/20-diet-myths-busted/

This may be of interest to some of you ( in fact it should be an interest to everyone). It is a fantastic approach to the way we eat and she busts many myths about eating, showing how we have become brainwashed about certain foods!

Very much worth an hour of your time to read this.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)




----------



## streaky (Dec 2, 2006)

The Mrs and I plus a mate of mine are on this great results.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Not sure I agree with the article, in that it does not work, my BMI was over 30 on 12th December 2011 and I was 14st 4, simply cutting my intake and changing my diet, for fruit instead of chocolate bars, more fresh cooked food instead of processed ready meals, and I'm down to under 12st was 11st 5 but gone back up slightly, waist from 36 down to 29" with no visits to the gym, been on my bike twice in the year.


----------



## streaky (Dec 2, 2006)

Avanti said:


> Not sure I agree with the article, in that it does not work,


What doesnt work for you?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> Not sure I agree with the article, in that it does not work, my BMI was over 30 on 12th December 2011 and I was 14st 4, simply cutting my intake and changing my diet, for fruit instead of chocolate bars, more fresh cooked food instead of processed ready meals, and I'm down to under 12st was 11st 5 but gone back up slightly, waist from 36 down to 29" with no visits to the gym, been on my bike twice in the year.


erm well if you read her stuff she focuses on natural foods not processed foods, so in a way yes you will have lost some weight by eating more natural foods...
its very indepth and backed by tons of research so up to you if you are going to read it. im not explaining it all.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

avit88 said:


> erm well if you read her stuff she focuses on natural foods not processed foods, so in a way yes you will have lost some weight by eating more natural foods...
> its very indepth and backed by tons of research so up to you if you are going to read it. im not explaining it all.


Not sure why you are getting touchy about my reply, I read enough to give comment (it's only my opinion on what I read) the impression I got was that it was leading to some kind of selling.
I lost weight by cutting the portions as well as cutting down on the rubbish foods (still eat them but less so) I can't really complain of what I have lost in 12 months, anddropping my BMI from just under 31 to under 25, but ultimately it was from cutting the calories, I have been on about 1800kcals per day for a good while until recently, before that probaly near 3000kcals.
But then if the content of the article leads, helps somebody then all is good :thumb:


----------



## Daffyplum (Mar 29, 2010)

So you started eating fruit instead of chocolate bars, fresh food instead of processed and cut your calories from 3000/day down to 1800/day and lost weight? What is your secret?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> Not sure why you are getting touchy about my reply, I read enough to give comment (it's only my opinion on what I read) the impression I got was that it was leading to some kind of selling.
> I lost weight by cutting the portions as well as cutting down on the rubbish foods (still eat them but less so) I can't really complain of what I have lost in 12 months, anddropping my BMI from just under 31 to under 25, but ultimately it was from cutting the calories, I have been on about 1800kcals per day for a good while until recently, before that probaly near 3000kcals.
> But then if the content of the article leads, helps somebody then all is good :thumb:


i wasnt touchy at all mate, just thought i would share this with people and if they follow it then fine if they dont i aint going to spell it out and force it on people.

I know people will say they have lost weight this way but until theyve read this they wont understand why etc and when they have read this they will then realise how much we have been brainwashed! Like even your answer shows you are brainwashed. Just read it then you will understand


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

Daffyplum said:


> So you started eating fruit instead of chocolate bars, fresh food instead of processed and cut your calories from 3000/day down to 1800/day and lost weight? What is your secret?


It's no secret, from what I read of the article it suggested doing just that , does not work


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

the first link is the best


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

avit88 said:


> i wasnt touchy at all mate, just thought i would share this with people and if they follow it then fine if they dont i aint going to spell it out and force it on people.
> 
> I know people will say they have lost weight this weigh but until theyve read this they wont understand why etc and when they have read this they will then realise how much we have been brainwashed! Like even your answer shows you are brainwashed. Just read it then you will understand


I did read the PDF article, nowt to be brainwashed about, many posters have posted that they have lost weight through various methods, it is not only the article method that works, with food it's about quality and quantity which ever school of thought one follows.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> It's no secret, from what I read of the article it suggested doing just that , does not work


you're confused because what you dont realise is that u cut your carbs which is the key to losing weight, again read the top link to understand.

the fact that u have reduced the calorific intake on your body will actually have resulted in making yourself unhealthier- ie your body need x amount of calories to carry out daily duties like cell repair etc if you limit this your body has to skimp on something


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> I did read the PDF article, nowt to be brainwashed about, many posters have posted that they have lost weight through various methods, it is not only the article method that works, with food it's about *quality and quantity* which ever school of thought one follows.


couldnt b more wrong mate


----------



## Daffyplum (Mar 29, 2010)

I'll read it in full but first impressions are good. Bottom line is that if you eat a balanced diet with less bad fats (not all fat is bad) and drink lots of water, and take regular exercise you 'll be okay. Obviously if you have a manual job and/or train then your body requires more food(fuel).


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Daffyplum said:


> I'll read it in full but first impressions are good. Bottom line is that if you eat a balanced diet with less bad fats (not all fat is bad) and drink lots of water, and take regular exercise you 'll be okay. Obviously if you have a manual job and/or train then your body requires more food(fuel).


Im glad you have said you'll read it first! There is no bad fat... but you'll see


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

avit88 said:


> you're confused because what you dont realise is that u cut your carbs which is the key to losing weight, again read the top link to understand.
> 
> the fact that u have reduced the calorific intake on your body will actually have resulted in making yourself unhealthier- ie your body need x amount of calories to carry out daily duties like cell repair etc if you limit this your body has to skimp on something


Although you say you are not getting touchy about my replies, it does seem that way, of course the carbs have been reduced, I'm certainley more healthy from it, a balanced diet of lower calories.
I wonder how many readers know their blood pressure, BMI, hba1c, cholesterol levels, optical prescription etc. I keep check on mine, so I know I am more healthy for it :thumb:


----------



## Daffyplum (Mar 29, 2010)

avit88 said:


> Im glad you have said you'll read it first! There is no bad fat... but you'll see


The fat around my midriff is bad fat!! :lol:


----------



## nick_mcuk (Jan 4, 2008)

Fact 8 is total utter ******...if it dont exist how come the blood tests I got back recently could tell me that my good cholesterol levels were low??

Sorry this woman is just another muppet spouting ****!


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> Although you say you are not getting touchy about my replies, it does seem that way, of course the carbs have been reduced, I'm certainley more healthy from it, a balanced diet of lower calories.
> I wonder how many readers know their blood pressure, BMI, hba1c, cholesterol levels, optical prescription etc. I keep check on mine, so I know I am more healthy for it :thumb:


again im not touchy, yeah mate read the damm pdf cholesteroll etc is irrelevant so why bother check it?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

nick_mcuk said:


> Fact 8 is total utter ******...if it dont exist how come the blood tests I got back recently could tell me that my good cholesterol levels were low??
> 
> Sorry this woman is just another muppet spouting ****!


because the nhs think there is bad and good cholesterol again never been proven etc so what you did was a waste of time! cholesterol is essential for life, in fact low cholesteral is bad for you because it is used as the main source of repair within the body.... read the pdf


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Daffyplum said:


> The fat around my midriff is bad fat!! :lol:


lol true that is


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

read this for cholesteral http://www.zoeharcombe.com/the-knowledge/we-have-got-cholesterol-completely-wrong/


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

avit88 said:


> read this for cholesteral http://www.zoeharcombe.com/the-knowledge/we-have-got-cholesterol-completely-wrong/


I have read it, nothing there I wasn't aware of, what is puzzling me, is why you believe this author is correct and absoulutely everybody else is incorrect?
Have you practiced the author's methods to good effect?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/the-knowledge/ happy reading
spread the word


----------



## Willows-dad (Jul 12, 2012)

A very interesting read. Bring on the turkey and fresh roasted veg, and roast potatoes in goose fat! Just means I have to try and leave the sweets alone.
Very informative though, thanks for posting.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> I have read it, nothing there I wasn't aware of, what is puzzling me, is why you believe this author is correct and absoulutely everybody else is incorrect?
> Have you practiced the author's methods to good effect?


clearly you still believe in cholesterol being bad then otherwise u wouldnt check it!

because all the stuff you are fed by nhs media, fsa, etc has never been proven and she can back this up with countless evidence
for example there was a russian or canadian (forgive me I forget) who tried to prove cholesterol was bad for you, he gave up because he couldnt and then tried to prove sat fat was... still hasnt proven it

she provides facts that are based up biological science, and articles upon articles of evidence to support it. In essence the nhs etc have no evidence and it is all a money making scheme that has gone so far from the truth!

put it this way mother nature gave us cholesterol ie its made by our bodies... if it killed us why would it make it? our body is designed purely to protect itself. Did we test our cholesterol 12000 years ago? nope does a cheetah who eats meat all day long?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Willows-dad said:


> A very interesting read. Bring on the turkey and fresh roasted veg, and roast potatoes in goose fat! Just means I have to try and leave the sweets alone.
> Very informative though, thanks for posting.


thanks for reading mate, hope it keeps you happy and healthy! 
Spread the word!


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

avit88 said:


> *clearly you still believe in cholesterol being bad then otherwise u wouldnt check it!*
> 
> because all the stuff you are fed by nhs media, fsa, etc has never been proven and she can back this up with countless evidence
> for example there was a russian or canadian (forgive me I forget) who tried to prove cholesterol was bad for you, he gave up because he couldnt and then tried to prove sat fat was... still hasnt proven it
> ...


Where did I say all cholestorol is bad?
Why ask why check this or why check that, is diet not partially about checking weight? otherwise what is this thread about?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Avanti said:


> Where did I say all cholestorol is bad?
> Why ask why check this or why check that, is diet not partially about checking weight? otherwise what is this thread about?


you kinda have the wrong end of the stick here mate, if your not interested fine, if you want it explaining because i posted this thread im willing to try and explain it. Otherwise just carry on doing what you're doing without turning this thread negative. :wall:


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

Every diet works , they all do you just need to stick to them that's the hard bit 

Less energy than your body needs will result in your fat reserves being used up , too much and you store fat 

If the human race genuinely needed certain foods to survive and couldn't fast then as a species we would have died out thousands of years ago


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Richf said:


> Every diet works , they all do you just need to stick to them that's the hard bit
> 
> Less energy than your body needs will result in your fat reserves being used up , too much and you store fat
> 
> If the human race genuinely needed certain foods to survive and couldn't fast then as a species we would have died out thousands of years ago


but they arent all necessarily healthy, take the slim fast shake diet.... processed powder as a substitute for natural food.


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

avit88 said:


> you kinda have the wrong end of the stick here mate, *if your not interested fine, if you want it explaining because i posted this thread im willing to try and explain it.* Otherwise just carry on doing what you're doing without turning this thread negative. :wall:


Of course I'm interested, otherwise I would not have commented on the thread, glad you are now willing to explain it as earlier you did say "I'm not going to explain it, read the article" 
I'm always willing to hear what somebody has to say and I would rather hear the summary of the article from somebody other than the author, the last link you psosted started well and then drifted on to American tripe, I'm still waiting for the day they claim Jesus was actually American 
But you get the idea, lots of people here say blades scratch, washing up liquid strips wax, does not mean the claims are true.
I had a brother who perhaps would have equally bought straight into the 'myths' portraid in the article, and not attempted to balance certain health factors that could be controlled by diet, sadly he is resting where no shadows fall just over 3 years now


----------



## t1mmy (Dec 9, 2006)

I've started reading it on my iPhone, will read it properly tomorrow on a bigger screen. I can't see at the moment how she can explain weight gain in conjunction with body fat % lowering.

I'm always open to learning more.


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

I think I've read all five of her books now. It is amazing what you discover when you scratch the surface (I guess it's true of anything, not just nutrition).


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

t1mmy said:


> I've started reading it on my iPhone, will read it properly tomorrow on a bigger screen. I can't see at the moment how she can explain weight gain in conjunction with body fat % lowering.
> 
> I'm always open to learning more.


hey a runner like yourself will need to look a bit deeper into it, her website doesnt go into as much detail as her books but the main thing with people who exercise is that we can eat something high in sugar a bit before the run and our body will use this straight away and not store it was fat.

this works on the principle that if you eat fats and carbs together the body uses the carbs instantly and stores the fat so you have to eat either or in a meal not both.

whether you choose to do the first thing is up to you and also what type of sugary food too. She isnt recommending we do this all the time but in theory what I have explained should happen.

sorry dont quite follow the bf comment, i cant find where she says that, so cant help.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

empsburna said:


> I think I've read all five of her books now. It is amazing what you discover when you scratch the surface (I guess it's true of anything, not just nutrition).


my father in law has the fat guy book which i sat and read, and he also has the recipe book so Ive ordered them! cant wait for them to come.

Ive been trying to nail my diet for ages now and had done well, but this is just the icing on the cake for me and if we think about it who can argue with nature?


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

avit88 said:


> but they arent all necessarily healthy, take the slim fast shake diet.... processed powder as a substitute for natural food.


Processed powder yes but with all the vitamins and minerals you need , it's better than high fat diets


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Richf said:


> Processed powder yes but with all the vitamins and minerals you need , it's better than high fat diets


:lol: read the pdf mate


----------



## t1mmy (Dec 9, 2006)

avit88 said:


> hey a runner like yourself will need to look a bit deeper into it, her website doesnt go into as much detail as her books but the main thing with people who exercise is that we can eat something high in sugar a bit before the run and our body will use this straight away and not store it was fat.
> 
> this works on the principle that if you eat fats and carbs together the body uses the carbs instantly and stores the fat so you have to eat either or in a meal not both.
> 
> ...


Cheers for the reply.

My bf query came from the 3rd article down. She states "Weight gain is about fat stored ...Equally, weight loss is about fat lost"

I'll have to read the rest in more depth but at a first glance that seems odd. She does get a bit sciencey after that so it may explain more.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

t1mmy said:


> Cheers for the reply.
> 
> My bf query came from the 3rd article down. She states "Weight gain is about fat stored ...Equally, weight loss is about fat lost"
> 
> I'll have to read the rest in more depth but at a first glance that seems odd. She does get a bit sciencey after that so it may explain more.


ah yeah myth no 4 yeah read it again she explains it well, might need to read it a few times to understand it fully.... i know i did! 

it just goes into more detail of the rule of not eating carbs and fat together in one meal.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

like anyone trying to promote their own work, agenda and profit from 'advice' I'll take it all with a pinch of salt....

I'll read a lot from what people say, but my test is always BMI... if the person doesn't explain it properly, then, simply put, I'm out, as they aren't telling the truth... and if they don't tell the truth about something as simple as that, they are after something else... usually your money...

so, she failed in that... I'm out.

:thumb:


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

just to show what I mean, before more toys get flung out the pram... both of the pictures below show males with large BMI numbers, which mean they are both in the unhealthy section... 



















you see the problem with stupid figures like BMI... :lol:

:thumb:


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

The problem is that BMI was/is not about health it was simply developed by the insurance industry as a tool to group people


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

The Cueball said:


> like anyone trying to promote their own work, agenda and profit from 'advice' I'll take it all with a pinch of salt....
> 
> I'll read a lot from what people say, but my test is always BMI... if the person doesn't explain it properly, then, simply put, I'm out, as they aren't telling the truth... and if they don't tell the truth about something as simple as that, they are after something else... usually your money...
> 
> ...


Absolutely , anyone can call themselves a nutritionist

http://carbsanity.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/zoe-harcombe-credentials.html


----------



## Avanti (Jan 17, 2006)

The Cueball said:


> *like anyone trying to promote their own work, agenda and profit from 'advice' I'll take it all with a pinch of salt....*
> 
> I'll read a lot from what people say, but my test is always BMI... if the person doesn't explain it properly, then, simply put, I'm out, as they aren't telling the truth... and if they don't tell the truth about something as simple as that,* they are after something else... usually your money...*
> 
> ...


I am always wary of anybody slagging off the competition rather than sell their news or wares on it's strengths and merits.
Foods breaks down into proteins, fats and sugars. So to say eat just carbs or just sugar or fats is not an option since foods contain them all.
That's why I mentioned earlier counting the kcals is enough for many people as, 200kcals of vegetables vs 200kcals of ice cream will soon show itself in portion sizes.
For many living a sedenatary lifestyle as you do when you get older, the intake has to reduce and be balanced.
What I wasn't chuffed about with the articles were that they were pushing on to read whole books elsewhere, rather than summarise with the option for further information if required. 
It was no accident I started cooking and baking over the last 12 months


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

again shes not made a report about bmi, infact she rarely talks about it, just refers to it as the government do and she actually normally uses this to prove the government have gone wrong/dont know what their talking about.

bmi is just another government piece of leg... which is useless as you've said cuey

as for all foods contain carb fats and proteins, yes most do but they are generally processed foods if you think about it. natural foods will contain either mainly fat and a small amount of carb (not enough to upset the transport of fatty acids) or mainly carbs and a small amount of fat ( not enough for the person to store the fat) 

every natural food contains proteins ie amino acids as they are the building blocks of life and that food wouldnt exist if there werent made of protein...

im not trying to sell her just clear her theories up, her book is great though and only small, and only about £7 so def worth the read.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Richf said:


> Absolutely , anyone can call themselves a nutritionist
> 
> http://carbsanity.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/zoe-harcombe-credentials.html


i think that review just shows the state we are in, Im not saying she is 100% correct but because her theory is based upon eating natural food provided by nature, backs up her findings many times and has the biological knowledge to prove it I cant help but be interested.

the fsa, nhs etc havent a clue what to tell people anymore, most of their stuff is made up, so why arent they slagged off? But millions of people follow it and its not proven at all. Her methods are at least backed up by evidence etc.

as for slagging her off for what she eats.. she is human im sure even she will indulge in chocolate etc from time to time!?

its a multi billion pound industry for example, some guy made up that cholesterol is bad for you..(never proven) so they tell you its bad, brand every packet of cereal saying it will lower your cholesterol, they give fat people pills upon pills (which make the person supplying them millions of pounds per year) Then the nhs scare us all by saying we should test is all the time to see if its high or low.... thats just one example.

she makes a very good point about, obsesity and cancer, (which was unheard of 150 years ) We dont know what is put into all these man made foods, pills etc, there are more stresses in life, we built cars and factories that pump out pollution.... Nobody knows what effect they are having on us because they havent been around long enough!

Magerine, which was banned in canada up until 1940 (because they needed some butter supplement for the war) is made by changing natural fats in a reaction that uses the metal nickle as a catalyst....

yum nickle....what on earth is that doing to us in the long run?

she is not saying 'This is the next big thing follow me to lose weight!' She is trying to educate us and make us eat like we used to before we got obese etc, ie eating natural foods, but with the knowledge of what is going off in today's word.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

avit88 said:


> again shes not made a report about bmi, infact she rarely talks about it, just refers to it as the government do and she actually normally uses this to prove the government have gone wrong/dont know what their talking about.
> 
> bmi is just another government piece of leg... which is useless as you've said cuey


hmmm.. if that is the case, and you know about her work than I do... I would have thought the better place for the BMI section would have been in the "myths" section... :speechles 

As such, where she has put it, the first paragraph AFTER the myths, kind of tells me that she supports it, and places it very high on her list of things she agrees with...

I do see any bit of her work in the PDF that she says, something like, well I don't agree with the BMI... she is presenting it as fact...Only in my opinion...

But anyway, if you like her and her message, then it's all good... as long as people are doing something about their health, and opening their eyes to some of the damage that is being thrown on us, I'm not going to complain (too much! - you know I have to moan somewhere! :lol: )

:thumb:


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

Richf said:


> Processed powder yes but with all the vitamins and minerals you need , it's better than high fat diets


:lol::lol: had to double laugh at this one. Read the nutrition label on these things, they are 99% sugar. Nothing that is 99% sugar is good for you.

Fat is not bad for you whereas Sugar is. This is the exact brain washing they talk about. The less the population listens to the NHS and government recommendations the healthier they will be.

"Cholesterol in food has no impact on cholesterol in the blood and we've known that all along." If people take away anything from this thread, it should be this statement. All the lower Cholesterol Butters, Breads, etc and the only thing that looses weight is your wallet. Its like the low fat, lowers cholesterol margarine, so much worse for you than grass fed natural full fat butter.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Bod42 said:


> :lol::lol: had to double laugh at this one. Read the nutrition label on these things, they are 99% sugar. Nothing that is 99% sugar is good for you.
> 
> Fat is not bad for you whereas Sugar is. This is the exact brain washing they talk about. The less the population listens to the NHS and government recommendations the healthier they will be.


well said matey! :thumb:

yes if people didnt know this there are virtually no vitamins etc in sugar and flour which unfortunately is the basis of a lot of westerner's diet!

yet the government instructs us to eat a mainly starch based diet?!?!


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

Bod42 said:


> :lol::lol: had to double laugh at this one. Read the nutrition label on these things, they are 99% sugar. Nothing that is 99% sugar is good for you.
> 
> Fat is not bad for you whereas Sugar is. This is the exact brain washing they talk about. The less the population listens to the NHS and government recommendations the healthier they will be.
> 
> "Cholesterol in food has no impact on cholesterol in the blood and we've known that all along." If people take away anything from this thread, it should be this statement. All the lower Cholesterol Butters, Breads, etc and the only thing that looses weight is your wallet. Its like the low fat, lowers cholesterol margarine, so much worse for you than grass fed natural full fat butter.


99% of sugar like hell perhaps you should read the label on them!! They are 80% milk for a start

Yes they do have sugar in them but also critically vitamins and minerals are added , if you eat a high fat diet like say Atkins then you are unable to get enough vitamins and mineral from the foods you eat ie fruits, vegetables and grains

Fat isn't bad per se but much like sugar it's calorie dense meaning you can't eat very much of it.


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

avit88 said:


> well said matey! :thumb:
> 
> yes if people didnt know this there are virtually no vitamins etc in sugar and flour which unfortunately is the basis of a lot of westerner's diet!
> 
> yet the government instructs us to eat a mainly starch based diet?!?!


flour in particular white flour is loaded with calcium and iron!


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

avit88 said:


> well said matey! :thumb:
> 
> yes if people didnt know this there are virtually no vitamins etc in sugar and flour which unfortunately is the basis of a lot of westerner's diet!
> 
> yet the government instructs us to eat a mainly starch based diet?!?!


I wish I could find a link but I remember reading an article that showed when the government guidelines were released in 1977 that basically blamed every disease known to man on saturated fat and therefore the low fat diet was born but the increase in obesity rate sky rocketed. If you change a populations diet and that causes them to become more obese and therefore less healthy, how can this be good for you?

Funny thing is its 35 years later, obesity is still rising, but people still believe the government.


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Richf said:


> flour in particular white flour is loaded with calcium and iron!


source? who have u heard this from? what evidence have you got?

do you really think that a powder made in a factory with synthetic man made vitamins injected into it is better than a high fat diet based upon eating natural food such as animal meats that have been untouched my man?


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Bod42 said:


> I wish I could find a link but I remember reading an article that showed when the government guidelines were released in 1977 that basically blamed every disease known to man on saturated fat and therefore the low fat diet was born but the increase in obesity rate sky rocketed. If you change a populations diet and that causes them to become more obese and therefore less healthy, how can this be good for you?
> 
> Funny thing is its 35 years later, obesity is still rising, but people still believe the government.


you are spot on mate, she proves this in her book and also goes on to prove that the government have never actually proved sat fat is bad for us so they have no evidence from which they advise us all to eat a "healthier" diet.

fsa stated in 1984, 1994 and 2009 that is has not been proven nor will it ever be and nor will it ever be likely that such a test will be carried out!

so how can they say its bad for you!?! shocks me!


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

Richf said:


> 99% of sugar like hell perhaps you should read the label on them!! They are 80% milk for a start
> 
> Yes they do have sugar in them but also critically vitamins and minerals are added , if you eat a high fat diet like say Atkins then you are unable to get enough vitamins and mineral from the foods you eat ie fruits, vegetables and grains
> 
> Fat isn't bad per se but much like sugar it's calorie dense meaning you can't eat very much of it.


I think you should check the website if your unsure. 24grams of Carbs of which 18grams is sugar. Thats 75% by my calculations. "80% Milk for a start" check the label on your milk, 100% of the carbs in Milk are Sugar so that arguement doesnt help.

Fat is nothing like Sugar. Sugar is useless to the body whereas fat isnt.

I would never suggest going as extremem as atkins but if you eat a meat and mostly green veg diet, you will get the vitamins and minerals you need. I am pretty sure all our ancestors got by fine without Slim Fast and just eating meat and veg.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

Bod42 said:


> I wish I could find a link but I remember reading an article that showed when the government guidelines were released in 1977 that basically blamed every disease known to man on saturated fat and therefore the low fat diet was born but the increase in obesity rate sky rocketed. If you change a populations diet and that causes them to become more obese and therefore less healthy, how can this be good for you?
> 
> Funny thing is its 35 years later, obesity is still rising, but people still believe the government.


why can't people see that?!? :lol: it's pretty obvious... mind you, I hate anything that is a 'diet'... 

:wall:

:thumb:


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

The Cueball said:


> why can't people see that?!? :lol: it's pretty obvious... mind you, I hate anything that is a 'diet'...
> 
> :wall:
> 
> :thumb:


I'm the same when I used to train people I would never use the word diet. Diet to me means short term, if your only going to do something short term, you only get short term results.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

Bod42 said:


> I'm the same when I used to train people I would never use the word diet. Diet to me means short term, if your only going to do something short term, you only get short term results.


yeah, my way of thinking, a diet is, by it's very nature a restrictive thing, so always going to end in failure...

better to read up, understand a bit more and change to a healthy lifestyle, and still leave a small bit for 'fun' eating...

:thumb:


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

Bod42 said:


> I think you should check the website if your unsure. 24grams of Carbs of which 18grams is sugar. Thats 75% by my calculations. "80% Milk for a start" check the label on your milk, 100% of the carbs in Milk are Sugar so that arguement doesnt help.
> 
> Fat is nothing like Sugar. Sugar is useless to the body whereas fat isnt.
> 
> I would never suggest going as extremem as atkins but if you eat a meat and mostly green veg diet, you will get the vitamins and minerals you need. I am pretty sure all our ancestors got by fine without Slim Fast and just eating meat and veg.


Of course our ancestors ate sugars , even meat and fats contain some carbs let alone fruits grains etc, our ancestors ate very little fats and very little meat

During the wartime when meat was rationed our diet was the healthiest it's been for a long long time

We need to get away from this one type of thing is bad and cut back on everything , the reason the western diet is bad is because we eat more than we need to , if we did more we could eat more. Cutting out fat, sugar or any single aspect of our diet is madness and doomed to failure

People always want the quick fix that's why there is always the latest theory of how we have been doing it wrong all these years and if you just do this one simple thing the weight will fall off , it's nonsense and only good for selling books

Losing weight is simple eat less calories than you need.

Problem is this is damn hard and that's why people don't do it


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

Richf said:


> ...our ancestors ate very little fats and very little meat .


It depends on the part of the world you were from (and the climate) but it was probably closer to 80% of calories were from fat which made up about 35-40% of the diet - the rest was insect protein and whatever they could dig up and eat (usually leafy, usually green).



Richf said:


> During the wartime when meat was rationed our diet was the healthiest it's been for a long long time


Yup, I can't argue with that, but it only got better because the poorest people got to eat better than they did before bringing the average up. Because sugar and white bread was rationed people did tend to weigh less too. 


Richf said:


> We need to get away from this one type of thing is bad and cut back on everything , the reason the western diet is bad is because we eat more than we need to , if we did more we could eat more. Cutting out fat, sugar or any single aspect of our diet is madness and doomed to failure


Unfortunately, more recent (independent) research has shown that eating more and exercising less isn't our problem - it is the composition of our food sources that are the problem (HFCS anyone?). You can quite easily cut out the sugar (read carbohydrates) as your body can make as much as it needs from protein. 


Richf said:


> People always want the quick fix that's why there is always the latest theory of how we have been doing it wrong all these years and if you just do this one simple thing the weight will fall off , it's nonsense and only good for selling books


The evidence is starting to mount about nutrition and just how badly wrong we have got it in the past 20 years.



Richf said:


> Losing weight is simple eat less calories than you need.


Again, calorie deficit model has been proven recently to not work. Eating less and exercising more has been proven to make you hungrier and to down regulate your metabolism. It is quite funny (and I have been guilty of thinking that way) that the law of thermodynamics can be applied to humans.

If we exercise more our body will tell us to eat more.
If we eat less our body will tell us to exercise less.

You might see some temporary body mass changes but it will soon go back on.

Contrary to "conventional wisdom" it isn't about what we eat, how many calories we burn off or how much exercise we do it is all about WHAT we eat.



Richf said:


> Problem is this is damn hard and that's why people don't do it


Yup, starvation and prolonged exercise is inflammatory and your body will hate you for it and tell you at every opportunity (make you tired, ache, hate the gym).

PS: Insulin/Blood sugar control is the answer to it all 

PPS: .. and 42


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

Bod42 said:


> I wish I could find a link but I remember reading an article that showed when the government guidelines were released in 1977 that basically blamed every disease known to man on saturated fat and therefore the low fat diet was born but the increase in obesity rate sky rocketed. If you change a populations diet and that causes them to become more obese and therefore less healthy, how can this be good for you?
> 
> Funny thing is its 35 years later, obesity is still rising, but people still believe the government.


Ansel Keys seven countries study?

If the answer you get doesn't fit the data you collected remove the data until it fits lol.

John Yudkin got it right (Pure White and Deadly, published 1986)


----------



## Richf (Apr 26, 2008)

empsburna said:


> PS: Insulin/Blood sugar control is the answer to it all


Agree with that since that is directly linked to appetite, I know for me and my family we dont process sugars well and a low carb diet is more sustainable albiet not especially healthy in the long term, but it still boils down to fuel in and fuel out

I'd love to see a proper study that debunks that basic fact , i've seen a few where the opposite has been shown

The perils of sugar just like fat before it have been over rated and there have been many studies which have failed to demonstrate significant health issues apart from tooth decay

However if exercising less made us eat less we would not be having this discussion in the first place


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

Richf said:


> Agree with that since that is directly linked to appetite, I know for me and my family we dont process sugars well and a low carb diet is more sustainable albiet not especially healthy in the long term, but it still boils down to fuel in and fuel out
> 
> I'd love to see a proper study that debunks that basic fact , i've seen a few where the opposite has been shown
> 
> ...


You can totally remove carbohydrate from your diet, your body doesn't need it. (It can make what it needs for your brain/eyes).

Exercising less does make you eat less, down regulation of metabolism. Eating the wrong things makes you hungry.

I will try to find a link to a (very recent) study in the New England Journal of Medicine about how carbohydrates are fattening than fat or protein. they did a follow up with a large percentage of people that took part in a study. It is just one study though so can't base a lot on it. It looked at overall health after the study was over. It seemed that inflammation markers were much reduced even after they put weight back on in the group that followed a reduced carb diet.


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

Here it is - Four-Year Follow-up after Two-Year Dietary Interventions


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

This is the original study -Weight Loss with a Low-Carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or Low-Fat Diet


----------



## ShiningScotsman (Jun 20, 2012)

OP thanks for posting this - I have been banging on for ages to my other half that she cant take in only 1200 calories per day - do a full days work and then excersise to burn of 500 calories without there being a trade off and something else suffering.

Zoe suggests what suffers is the regeneration of cells or cell repair.
In fact eating little and often actually discourages your body to repair cells where as periods of no food intake or even mild fasting encourage the body to repair instead of generating new cells which we know can lead to all other kinds of horrible disease.

I think a healthy dose of common sense mixed with some of the learnings in this info peppered with knowledge on how the body works instead of just being fed hype by the media will lead to great results.
More importantly people need to listen to, pay attention to and know their own bodies to get long term gain.

Just following a set of instructions like a bunch of lemmings without the understanding behind why it works or doesnt is as dangerous as doing nothing.

Thanks for the post


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

Calories in vs calories out works in theory but how many things work in theory but not in real life.

There is just no way your body composition will change (which is what you want not just weight lose) the same if you eat 2000 calories of pure sugar sweets compared with 2000 calories from meat and greens.

As said above carbs are the one item of our diet that is actually not needed. You need both protein and fat but not carbs, reading between the lines this should tell you something on how our bodies are designed. Why would our body be designed and have evolved with the ability to change protein and fats to carbs if we ate a predominantly carb based diet. We need Protein and fat to live so if we had a predominantly carb based diet for millions of years I'm sure the body would have evolved the oppoite way.

When I referred to ancestors I meant before war time, I was more refferencing when we hunted for our food. We have been around for hundreds of thousands of years so referring to a war (depending which one you were referring too) 50-100 years ago doesnt show our natural eating habits. If you were stranded in the middle of a forest thousands of miles away from any where (if there is such a place now) what would you eat, some fruit, some veg mostly green and probably mostly meat. I just cant see how we ate very little meat and fat when carb rich sources of food like potatos are seasonal, what did we eat in the winter if not fat and meat.

Yes we would have eaten sugar hundreds of years ago but the low amount in fruit couple with the fibre would be very low comapred with the amount an average person consumes now. And thats natural sugar compared with the refined white sugar and fructose corn syrup.



Richf said:


> However if exercising less made us eat less we would not be having this discussion in the first place


 Ah but we would. This is exactly the point empsburna has been saying. Its about what we eat not all about how much we eat.

I have seen it myself training people, they walk in say they are no longer loosing weight on 1000 calories a day, I bump them back up to 1500-2000 calories but eating properly and they loose weight.


----------



## Guitarjon (Jul 13, 2012)

Various people ha e various ideas and the industry is full of them. What works for me is a calorie controlled diet. However, I have found that being on a diet (so to speak) means I eat more natural foods and less processed. I usually stick within my allowance. However, I have found that refined sugars, flour, and bread based food slows my progress down even when I am we'll within the calorie allowance. 

I have lost over 4 and a half stone doin this. I measure food weight out accurately and count calories using my fitness pal. I try and stick to natural foods and drink at least 2.5liters of water a day. When I'm focused I go to months just drinking water and tea black or green/white. I don't eat bread and my white carbs are cut. I et the main carbs from fruit and veg and a very small portion of potato/ brown rice or pasta. I start my day with porridge too. It's amazing the amount of food we feel we need to have on our plates. 

Also I feel bmi is a complete load of rubbish. How can you compare a 5 foot 10 18 stone rugby player to an arm chair bandit of the same weight?


----------



## whoami (Feb 25, 2007)

Does this lady have any recognised qualifications?


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

Guitarjon said:


> Also I feel bmi is a complete load of rubbish. How can you compare a 5 foot 10 18 stone rugby player to an arm chair bandit of the same weight?


Off topic but exactly right. BMI gives an absolutely useless figure that means nothing. Some doctors have now agreed to this and instead use a waist measurement which is just as useless.



whoami said:


> Does this lady have any recognised qualifications?


No idea but I think I'm different in that I listen to people who put in the research time and dont have qualifications as much if not more than people who do. I know they have studied etc but its during those studies that they get told what to learn and whats right to a certain degree whereas people who learn from scratch and learn in the trenches, learn themselves and therefore learn things outside the norm.

Qualifications arent everything as proven by people who left school with pretty much no qualifications like Ricard Branson, Alan Sugar, etc.


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

whoami said:


> Does this lady have any recognised qualifications?


I believe she is a qualified nutritionist but mainly focuses on research as numbers seem to be more her thing.


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

Crap like this making headlines and people wonder why the world is getting fatter and brainwashed.

http://uk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/ready...mie-oliver-and-nigella-lawson--094427967.html


----------



## avit88 (Mar 19, 2012)

Bod42 said:


> Crap like this making headlines and people wonder why the world is getting fatter and brainwashed.
> 
> http://uk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/ready...mie-oliver-and-nigella-lawson--094427967.html


oh dear... theres no hope!


----------



## empsburna (Apr 5, 2006)

Until it is widely accepted that fat isn't fattening there is no hope.


----------



## GlynRS2 (Jan 21, 2006)

I think in life it is healthy to be cynical.

What is in this for the author? Is she driven by an evangelical desire to cure the obesity epidemic or the desire to make a lot of money out of it?
She quotes a lot of evidence to back her theories but what is she "forgetting" to quote and omit from her arguments? Having personally reviewed plenty of research evidence in numerous fields before it is very easy to find material to support a point of view and appear justified; but to even approach what might be the truth requires very close examination of all the available evidence that can withstand idependant vigorous review from those that may have a differing view point.
What are her qualifications to be the only person who is right on this issue and better informed than all the scientists that have stiudied this before?

The thing that always amazes me is that people will believe things to be absolute truths if presented to them in a manner that fits with what they would like to believe. There is a lot of play on conspiracy theory and "you can never trust what the government tell you" type stuff in her literature. Why?

I am not making any judgements just asking questions. Don't blindly accept this stuff as the truth. I am not saying it is incorrect, in fact I don't think it saying much that hasn't been said before, but maybe ask more questions and do some of your own research before taking it hook, line and sinker


----------



## Bod42 (Jun 4, 2009)

There is not one person in any field that I believe 100%. I like to read/study all the info and research I can and based on this make an educated decision.

As you say 99% of people are out to make a name for themselves and therefore make money so you cant trust what people say as they are not necessarily looking after your best interests. 

I dont believe everything Zoe says but I do agree with a lot.


----------

