Author Topic: LCHF and healthy eating  (Read 155303 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2471
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1980 on: December 04, 2019, 06:22:18 PM »
Not hurting me, I’m enjoying  the best health of life while the health of those my age is steadily declining.

Epidemiological evidence is weak and even the the correlations they’re showing are weaker and even then no where on that U-shaped curve are there people eating the amounts of fats or the amounts of sugar I eat.


Yeah, the adverse relationship between low-carbohydrate intake and mortality could suddenly reverse at some even lower carbohydrate intake, but Occam wouldn't hold his breath.

Or the alleged effect could turn out to non-existent if the data analyzed actually and accurately represented reality.

You’re a great example of confirmation bias in the ideologue.  The ‘alleged’ effect is real, not just fake news.  If the effect wasn’t real, representing reality in the data, then there would be no U-shaped curve of mortality versus reported carbohydrate intake.  If the reported carbohydrate intake bore no relationship to actual carbohydrate intake, or there was no association between mortality and carbohydrate intake, then there would be no curve.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1981 on: December 04, 2019, 06:27:15 PM »
Not hurting me, I’m enjoying  the best health of life while the health of those my age is steadily declining.

Epidemiological evidence is weak and even the the correlations they’re showing are weaker and even then no where on that U-shaped curve are there people eating the amounts of fats or the amounts of sugar I eat.


Yeah, the adverse relationship between low-carbohydrate intake and mortality could suddenly reverse at some even lower carbohydrate intake, but Occam wouldn't hold his breath.

Or the alleged effect could turn out to non-existent if the data analyzed actually and accurately represented reality.

You’re a great example of confirmation bias in the ideologue.  The ‘alleged’ effect is real, not just fake news.  If the effect wasn’t real, representing reality in the data, then there would be no U-shaped curve of mortality versus reported carbohydrate intake.  If the reported carbohydrate intake bore no relationship to actual carbohydrate intake, or there was no association between mortality and carbohydrate intake, then there would be no curve.

Unless there are numerous variables that affect the results and correlate with the imprecise reporting of macronutrient intake.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2471
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1982 on: December 04, 2019, 06:30:09 PM »
Not hurting me, I’m enjoying  the best health of life while the health of those my age is steadily declining.

Epidemiological evidence is weak and even the the correlations they’re showing are weaker and even then no where on that U-shaped curve are there people eating the amounts of fats or the amounts of sugar I eat.


Yeah, the adverse relationship between low-carbohydrate intake and mortality could suddenly reverse at some even lower carbohydrate intake, but Occam wouldn't hold his breath.

Or the alleged effect could turn out to non-existent if the data analyzed actually and accurately represented reality.

You’re a great example of confirmation bias in the ideologue.  The ‘alleged’ effect is real, not just fake news.  If the effect wasn’t real, representing reality in the data, then there would be no U-shaped curve of mortality versus reported carbohydrate intake.  If the reported carbohydrate intake bore no relationship to actual carbohydrate intake, or there was no association between mortality and carbohydrate intake, then there would be no curve.

Unless there are numerous variables that affect the results and correlate with the imprecise reporting of macronutrient intake.

Gibberish, absolute gibberish.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2765
    • jt512
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1983 on: December 04, 2019, 06:30:37 PM »
Not hurting me, I’m enjoying  the best health of life while the health of those my age is steadily declining.

Epidemiological evidence is weak and even the the correlations they’re showing are weaker and even then no where on that U-shaped curve are there people eating the amounts of fats or the amounts of sugar I eat.


Yeah, the adverse relationship between low-carbohydrate intake and mortality could suddenly reverse at some even lower carbohydrate intake, but Occam wouldn't hold his breath.

Or the alleged effect could turn out to non-existent if the data analyzed actually and accurately represented reality.


The affect was observed after controlling for a plethora of potentially confounding variables.  You can speculate that there is some other confounder that if controlled would explain the observation, but that's what you're doing—speculating—ignoring the extant data and  speculating that it would be something else if somebody had only done something else.
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1984 on: December 04, 2019, 07:32:37 PM »

 
The affect was observed after controlling for a plethora of potentially confounding variables.  You can speculate that there is some other confounder that if controlled would explain the observation, but that's what you're doing—speculating—ignoring the extant data and  speculating that it would be something else if somebody had only done something else.

So this data is gathered using FFQs taken once or twice (depending on which study) over the period of the study and then those results are compared after a number of years.

The FFQs themselves can't do a good job of measuring macronutrient proportions in diet even if taken in real time. (As an example, when I've filled out a FFQ based on my actual diet for a day, the macronutrient proportions were off by more than 20%). But they're not done in real time. Respondents are asked to estimate how much of certain foods they ate regularly over the last year, and those results are extrapolated for the next 10 to 50 to 20 years (depending on which study).

And while the "plethora of confounding variables" includes things like drinking, smoking, drugs and diagnosis of disease, it does not, and cannot take into account numerous other variables, like the "healthy living" variable. It's entirely possible that people (especially health professionals, who are highly represented in these studies) who ignore the standard healthy eating advice also ignore other healthy living advice and it's no surprise that the kind of weak correlations that they're identifying are appearing in the data.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2471
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1985 on: December 04, 2019, 08:23:30 PM »

 
The affect was observed after controlling for a plethora of potentially confounding variables.  You can speculate that there is some other confounder that if controlled would explain the observation, but that's what you're doing—speculating—ignoring the extant data and  speculating that it would be something else if somebody had only done something else.

So this data is gathered using FFQs taken once or twice (depending on which study) over the period of the study and then those results are compared after a number of years.

The FFQs themselves can't do a good job of measuring macronutrient proportions in diet even if taken in real time. (As an example, when I've filled out a FFQ based on my actual diet for a day, the macronutrient proportions were off by more than 20%). But they're not done in real time. Respondents are asked to estimate how much of certain foods they ate regularly over the last year, and those results are extrapolated for the next 10 to 50 to 20 years (depending on which study).

And while the "plethora of confounding variables" includes things like drinking, smoking, drugs and diagnosis of disease, it does not, and cannot take into account numerous other variables, like the "healthy living" variable. It's entirely possible that people (especially health professionals, who are highly represented in these studies) who ignore the standard healthy eating advice also ignore other healthy living advice and it's no surprise that the kind of weak correlations that they're identifying are appearing in the data.

You’re claiming that there’s no correlation between reported carbohydrate intake and actual carbohydrate intake, and that there’s no correlation between reported carbohydrate intake at one or two points of time and carbohydrate intake at other points of time in your first paragraph.  People's diets don’t change radically over time (I’ve reduced my carbohydrate intake, as a result of reducing my consumption of bread - because jt convinced me to do so).  And the estimate of carbohydrate intake might be wrong, but it’s not going to be completely wrong.  A high reported carbohydrate intake is likely to be a high actual carbohydrate intake, and a low reported carbohydrate intake is likely to be a low actual carbohydrate intake.

And then in your second paragraph, you’re actually arguing the opposite.  That people reporting high or low carbohydrate intakes are actually consuming high or low carbohydrate diets in reality.  And their poorer health and higher mortality is due to them not following the dietary guidelines, along with other medical advice, which is the real cause of the poorer health.

Make up your mind about what you’re claiming.  Either the data is accurate, or it’s not.  It can’t be both inaccurate and accurate.

« Last Edit: December 04, 2019, 11:07:53 PM by bachfiend »
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2765
    • jt512
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1986 on: December 04, 2019, 10:23:37 PM »

 
The affect was observed after controlling for a plethora of potentially confounding variables.  You can speculate that there is some other confounder that if controlled would explain the observation, but that's what you're doing—speculating—ignoring the extant data and  speculating that it would be something else if somebody had only done something else.

So this data is gathered using FFQs taken once or twice (depending on which study) over the period of the study and then those results are compared after a number of years.

The FFQs themselves can't do a good job of measuring macronutrient proportions in diet even if taken in real time. (As an example, when I've filled out a FFQ based on my actual diet for a day, the macronutrient proportions were off by more than 20%). But they're not done in real time. Respondents are asked to estimate how much of certain foods they ate regularly over the last year, and those results are extrapolated for the next 10 to 50 to 20 years (depending on which study).

And while the "plethora of confounding variables" includes things like drinking, smoking, drugs and diagnosis of disease, it does not, and cannot take into account numerous other variables, like the "healthy living" variable. It's entirely possible that people (especially health professionals, who are highly represented in these studies) who ignore the standard healthy eating advice also ignore other healthy living advice and it's no surprise that the kind of weak correlations that they're identifying are appearing in the data.

Please study a graduate level textbook on nutritional epidemiology and get back to me when you know what you're talking about and can express yourself coherently.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 12:41:00 AM by jt512 »
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1987 on: December 04, 2019, 11:09:35 PM »

 
The affect was observed after controlling for a plethora of potentially confounding variables.  You can speculate that there is some other confounder that if controlled would explain the observation, but that's what you're doing—speculating—ignoring the extant data and  speculating that it would be something else if somebody had only done something else.

So this data is gathered using FFQs taken once or twice (depending on which study) over the period of the study and then those results are compared after a number of years.

The FFQs themselves can't do a good job of measuring macronutrient proportions in diet even if taken in real time. (As an example, when I've filled out a FFQ based on my actual diet for a day, the macronutrient proportions were off by more than 20%). But they're not done in real time. Respondents are asked to estimate how much of certain foods they ate regularly over the last year, and those results are extrapolated for the next 10 to 50 to 20 years (depending on which study).

And while the "plethora of confounding variables" includes things like drinking, smoking, drugs and diagnosis of disease, it does not, and cannot take into account numerous other variables, like the "healthy living" variable. It's entirely possible that people (especially health professionals, who are highly represented in these studies) who ignore the standard healthy eating advice also ignore other healthy living advice and it's no surprise that the kind of weak correlations that they're identifying are appearing in the data.

You’re claiming that there’s no correlation between reported carbohydrate intake and actual carbohydrate intake, and that there’s no correlation between reported carbohydrate intake at one or two points of time and carbohydrate intake at other points of time in your first paragraph.  People's diets don’t change radically over time (I’ve reduced my carbohydrate intake, as a result of reducing my consumption of bread - because jt convinced me to do so).  And the estimate of carbohydrate intake might be wrong, but it’s not going to be completely wrong.  A high reported carbohydrate intake is likely to be a high actual carbohydrate intake, and a low reported carbohydrate intake is likely to be a low actual carbohydrate intake.

And then in your second paragraph, you’re actually arguing the opposite.  That people reporting high or low carbohydrate intakes are actually consuming high or low carbohydrate diets in reality.  And their poorer health and higher mortality is due to them not following the dietary guidelines, along with other medical advice, which is the real cause of the poorer health.

Make up your mind about what you’re claiming.  Either the data is accurate, or it’s not.  It can’t be both inaccurate and accurate.


You’ve mischaracterization both those paragraphs to arrive at a non existent dilemma.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1988 on: December 04, 2019, 11:10:11 PM »
Maybe you should take a step back and look at the science without bias.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2471
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1989 on: December 04, 2019, 11:46:48 PM »
Maybe you should take a step back and look at the science without bias.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And maybe you should take a step back and look at the science without bias, which says nothing about the long term health effects (years and decades) of your low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diet in persons of all sizes and shapes, not just short term studies on the overweight and obese.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1990 on: December 05, 2019, 02:48:32 PM »
For the next time anyone suggests there is a consensus among medical professionals against LC diets

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451847619300788

Quote
For the 873 members who were attempting to lose weight, the most common dietary strategies were 14–24 h intermittent fasting (72%); very low-carbohydrate, ketogenic (46%); and calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate (26%). No other dietary strategy was reported by more than 15%. Overall, 78% were using more than one approach for weight loss, with the most common combinations being 14–24 h intermittent fasting with either a very low-carbohydrate, ketogenic (38%) or a calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate (17%) diet

• The physicians themselves tend to use intermittent fasting and ketogenic or low-carbohydrate diets.

• To their patients, they tend to recommend the same diets that they follow themselves, as well as several additional diets.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2765
    • jt512
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1991 on: December 05, 2019, 03:25:43 PM »
For the next time anyone suggests there is a consensus among medical professionals against LC diets


I assume you meant “first” time, and you were autocorrected. Otherwise one might think you were straw-manning.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1992 on: December 05, 2019, 04:56:13 PM »
For the next time anyone suggests there is a consensus among medical professionals against LC diets


I assume you meant “first” time, and you were autocorrected. Otherwise one might think you were straw-manning.

Daniel has said that repeatedly.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2471
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1993 on: December 05, 2019, 04:58:00 PM »
For the next time anyone suggests there is a consensus among medical professionals against LC diets

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451847619300788

Quote
For the 873 members who were attempting to lose weight, the most common dietary strategies were 14–24 h intermittent fasting (72%); very low-carbohydrate, ketogenic (46%); and calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate (26%). No other dietary strategy was reported by more than 15%. Overall, 78% were using more than one approach for weight loss, with the most common combinations being 14–24 h intermittent fasting with either a very low-carbohydrate, ketogenic (38%) or a calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate (17%) diet

• The physicians themselves tend to use intermittent fasting and ketogenic or low-carbohydrate diets.

• To their patients, they tend to recommend the same diets that they follow themselves, as well as several additional diets.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just 0.8% of the female physicians are ‘obesity doctors,’ and the survey is regarding their strategies adopted for personal weight loss, not long term diet and nutrition strategies.

For about the umteenth time, I accept that a low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diet is an acceptable weight loss diet.  But one of its purported advantages, that it leads to greater weight loss, is probably illusionary - glycogen is associated with 4 times in weight of water, so glycogen depletion will also lead to water loss too.  Depleting the 600 grams of normal glycogen stores will also lead to 2.4 kg of extra weight loss due to water loss.

I don’t know whether a LCHF ketogenic diet is a safe long term diet (years and decades), and nor do you.  The data is just lacking.

I was interested that one of the popular strategies employed was intermittent fasting, which is my strategy, and which is a safe long term strategy.  I just have one meal a day, and it includes a very healthy choice of foods, so I’m not restricted to your obsession with avoiding demonized carbohydrates.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 05:01:26 PM by bachfiend »
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12498
Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Reply #1994 on: December 05, 2019, 06:26:59 PM »
For the next time anyone suggests there is a consensus among medical professionals against LC diets

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451847619300788

Quote
For the 873 members who were attempting to lose weight, the most common dietary strategies were 14–24 h intermittent fasting (72%); very low-carbohydrate, ketogenic (46%); and calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate (26%). No other dietary strategy was reported by more than 15%. Overall, 78% were using more than one approach for weight loss, with the most common combinations being 14–24 h intermittent fasting with either a very low-carbohydrate, ketogenic (38%) or a calorie-restricted low-carbohydrate (17%) diet

• The physicians themselves tend to use intermittent fasting and ketogenic or low-carbohydrate diets.

• To their patients, they tend to recommend the same diets that they follow themselves, as well as several additional diets.


Just 0.8% of the female physicians are ‘obesity doctors,’ and the survey is regarding their strategies adopted for personal weight loss, not long term diet and nutrition strategies.



This is not a survey of doctors who practice obesity medicine, it is a survey of doctors.  No, they do not distinguish between short term and long term strategies.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

 

personate-rain
personate-rain