The George McGovern legacy: An equal distribution of poor health

The above image, no longer in use, is called the Food Pyramid. It contains within it suggestions for healthy eating. In my opinion, humble or not, it contains some of the worst dietary advice ever given.

    • It puts too much emphasis on vegetables and fruits. I’ve no problem with them, I like most of them, but I think them overrated in terms of health. In my diet I have a small glass of orange juice daily, though not religiously, and broccoli and onions, green peppers and jalapeños. These turn up in recipes. (As I will be discussing Keto in this piece, I mention here that on that system, we avoid vegetables grown underground, but eat many grown above. Potatoes and yams, for example, are diet death, french fries a never-no-no. Green beans? Not a big deal.) (Keep in mind that I am 71. If you are in your 20s, 30s or 40s, eat, drink and be merry!)
    • The pyramid suggests we eat less meat than fruits and vegetables by far. I even get the impression that it might want us to skip meat entirely. I get most of my nutrition from meat. It keeps me slim, and provides all the nutrients I need to stay healthy, except perhaps Vitamin C.
    • I would group cheese with meats, as it is something we can eat in any quantity without affecting our weight. I skip yogurt, and do not drink milk (except with coffee). I have never liked milk. Neither did my mother.
    • Fats and oils … use “sparingly?” The body loves fats of all kinds, saturated and not. In fact, our brains are comprised of mostly fat, 60% as I read it, meaning that my dad was 60% right in a certain insult he would occasionally lay on me. (For sake of humor, I am too hard on him. He never called me a “fathead.”)
    • The biggest problem with the above pyramid is the bottom, the bread, cereal, rice and pasta group – 6-11 servings daily! If you want to lose weight and avoid diabetes, you will ignore that recommendation. Of course we all love bread – I can wolf it down as well as anyone. But if I do, I pay a price – my weight mushrooms.
    • We can agree with one thing: Avoid sugars.

I am not saint, and do not suffer from lack of variety. When we have meals with friends and family, I do not turn away anything, as I think dieting in public is rude. It makes hosts uncomfortable. So if they put cake and ice cream in front of me, I eat and enjoy it. Eating with friends and family is a treat. So I do not live like a monk, and enjoy those sweets now and then.

Speaking of satiation, that last category, bread, cereal, rice and pasta are all primarily carbohydrates. The Keto plan, which I guess I am on (I used to call it “low-carbing”) emphasizes avoidance of carbs in all forms. The reasons are twofold: One, excess carbohydrates in the diet stimulate the body to produce insulin, a hormone that signals the body to store fat. That confuses people, that dietary fat does not end up as stored body fat. That’s why Keto works.

The other is that carb-based foods do not send the “satiated” signal to the brain, and we tend to overindulge. I know this for a fact, How many servings does the package of Oreos to the right contain? C’mon, we’ve all done it. The answer: One, two, or three.

Gary Taubes, whose name turns up later in this post, gave an excellent example of the difference between fat, protein and carbohydrates in one of his books. He wrote about the quantities of popcorn served at movie theaters. We eat and we eat and we eat, even after it stops tasting good. We do this because our body doesn’t send out the “enough” signal. Popcorn is pure carbs (although an excellent delivery vehicle for butter as well). Taubes suggested that instead of popcorn, we take a package of American cheese to the movies, and eat that. He’s not serious, of course, but the point is that we would eat one or two slices, and stop.

The Food Pyramid has been replaced now by the “My Plate”, seen to the left. It’s a simpler and easier-to-understand display. The advice that goes with it is, like the Food Pyramid, bad (in my view). It says we should eat less than we do, With Keto, appetite self-regulates, that is, we have no cravings and so no urge to eat more than we need. Even if we do overeat, we are equipped with a body that knows how to take care of that problem. I’ll leave that delicate matter at that. As with the Food Pyramid, MyPlate wants half my diet to be fruits and vegetables, discussed above. It says that any grains we eat should be whole grains (I don’t think the body cares about that). It says that we should switch to skim or low-fat milk, which is just wrong. It says to cut back or eliminate salt – more on that below, but that too is just wrong. Finally, it says to drink water instead of sugary drinks. Finally, we are in agreement.

I’ve probably told this story before, but in 2010 we traveled down the road to Boulder, Colorado. My political beliefs were far different than now. Noam Chomsky was invited to speak to a packed house somewhere on the campus, and we snagged the last two tickets. They were high in the balcony, and I had a very hard time squeezing my fat ass into my seat. I knew something had to change. I’d heard of low-carbing, but never really got in the habit. Sometime not too long after that night I got hold of a book by science journalist Gary Taubes, a best seller called Good Calories, Bad Calories. I followed the advice in the book (it is not a diet cook book; it contains no recipes), and gave up pizza, eventually all bread products, donuts, candy bars, sugared drinks of all kinds, beer, pie, cake. I love pizza. To this day, I miss it. But oddly, pizza aside, it was not hard. I found that it was much easier to totally do without things like that than to have a little bit.

In the ensuing months, my weight dropped from 232 to 210. In the ensuing years I have managed to get down to 202, but there I stop. I can go no further, the “plateau”. I love that weight, as all my clothes fit, and I look good in photos.

We’ve had holidays and vacations, and this morning I was shocked to find myself at 208. It can be a merry go-round. I do not look fat to myself in the mirror at the higher weight, but I wonder if I am self deluding.

Dietary fads come and go, and low-carbing, now going by the Keto label (short for ketosis, or the state the body is in when it is burning fat) was said to be just another fad by professional nutritionists who were hooked on calory counting. They were taught that if we burned more calories than we consumed, we would lose weight. It never works beyond temporary results. Dieting in that manner is sack cloth and ashes, leaving people hungry. Consequently, they do not last.

But there are still a lot of professionals who believe that myth, including the one who works for the magazine Consumer Reports. I’ve forgotten her name, but she did an article on healthy fast foods, and recommended one meal that contained 84 grams of carbs! As any Ketohead will tell you, that’s dietary suicide. She is old school, but apparently set in her ways.

(We have an acquaintance who, when last I saw her, was on a starvation diet, reducing her caloric intake to ridiculously low levels. In addition to this, she was horribly frightened by the alleged virus, and chastised us for not wearing masks when near her. I judged that between starvation and fear, she was having a psychotic breakdown.)

Quotes that follow are from an essay called Heads in the Sand: How Politics Created the Salt-Hypertension Myth, by Michelle Minton. I came across it in a book called Scientocracy, edited by Patrick J. Michaels and Terrence Kealey. While “salt” is in the title, she covers a wide range of dietary issues.

Similar to cholesterol and salt, dietary fat came to its place of villainy thanks to outspoken experts willing to make logical leaps based on early studies. Like [Lewis K.] Dahl, [an early and vocal opponent of salt in our diets] these early studies seem to show that populations with more fat in their diet had higher rates of heart disease. Like the recommendations to reduce salt, universal fat-reduction recommendations in the initial dietary guidelines were based on the unjustified assumption that lowering its intake would improve public health. Instead, as Americans ditched full-fat foods for low- and no-fat alternatives, we traded fats for carbohydrates and, perhaps not coincidentally, experienced a massive surge in the rates of diabetes and obesity. And like the salt debate, the debate around fat was fierce from the beginning, and the case against fat became flimsier over time, as research indicated that full-fat foods, rather than causing chronic disease, might actually offer protection against disease like diabetes and obesity. But it would take the US government decades to reverse itself, only admitting in 2015 that the focus should be on “optimizing types of dietary fats and not reducing total fat.”

I am an avid cook and am always on the lookout for good Keto recipes. Quite often those I find will recommend low- or no-salt or fat products, even substituting things like avocado for olive oil, skim milk for whole, and unsalted butter. This is a hangover. Bad diet advice lingers on long after official advice givers (as the Department of Agriculture and its food pyramid) have backed down. 2015 Seems the year when they finally came to their senses,

The salt wars go far back in history, to the Nixon presidency.

Throughout the 1960s, the evidence and views of the research community remained stubbornly inconclusive on the issue of salt. Yet many key figures had been swayed by Dahl’s research. One of these was Dr. Jean Mayer, scientific advisor to Pres. Richard Nixon. In 1969, Nixon chose Mayer to lead the White House Conference on Food, nutrition and health, a symposium of the nation’s top nutrition experts convened to review the existing evidence and reach a consensus about the top health questions of the day. Dahl was among those invited by Mayer to participate in the symposium, as was anti-fat proponent Ancel Keys (a key influence on dietary guidelines). Though the conference’s focus was on hunger and malnutrition, it frequently turned to the problem of “over-nutrition.” It also served as an arena in which the increasingly acrimonious salt debate would play out in full view of the public.

Over the decades the salt wars heated up, and money flowed freely to produce studies that said we should reduce salt in our diet as a means of resisting hypertension. But there was a problem – an equal number of studies said that reducing salt intake, far from advancing public health, was detrimental to many people. It is now accepted wisdom that salt intake is OK and healthy, but like all things in life, should not be done in extreme excess. For myself, I do not and have never worried about salt.

It was against this double shift that journalist Gary Taubes published his provocative and award-winning article on the debate for the journal Science. After interviewing some 80 researchers, clinicians, and administrators involved in salt policy, Taubes concluded that it’s fever emanated from the fact that the evidence for salt reduction was so tenuous; it generated the perceived need for consensus among those researchers who advocated it. Furthermore, protecting the appearance of consensus demanded that controversy either be dismissed or explained away as the product of a profit-motivated lobby.

The last hobgoblin to be discussed in the piece is cholesterol. It was a classic case of correlation=causation that led Senator George McGovern, scientists and the American public to believe that dietary cholesterol (eggs) were bad for us. After all, doctors performing heart surgeries came across clogged arteries and concluded that it we should avoid cholesterol in our diet. McGovern in the 1970s was head of the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. He also had a personal health scare, and became a client of diet guru Nathan Pritikin, who recommended a diet low in fat and free of sugar, meat, added salt, or processed foods. He also recommended running three miles a day, which McGovern did. The results were impressive for McGovern personally, so much so that his committee in 1977 would demonize cholesterol and any foods with with it, mostly eggs. (This same committee at that same time also went after salt and dietary fat.)

Time magazine cover from 1984 featuring two fried eggs in a strip of bacon on a plate in the shape of a smile. The accompanying headline, “Hold the Eggs and Butter; cholesterol is proved deadly,” help spread the dogma that diets high in fat and cholesterol almost invariably lead to heart disease. Yet after 15 years of bland breakfasts, Time featured a nearly identical cover, but with a slice of melon in place of the bacon in the face now smiling. Cholesterol, the magazine reported, is no longer something to worry about. The reversal on cholesterol came as a result of emerging research that the original warnings were not – and had never been – supported by science. It would take the US government an additional 16 years to update its own guidelines, finally forced to admit in 2015 that cholesterol was no longer a nutrient of concern.

So from the time of the 1977 McGovern committee recommendations, which were codified as official recommendations in the Department of Agriculture until 2015, nearly forty years, bad dietary advice prevailed. As McGovern’s committee was also influential in demonizing fat and salt in our diets, it can be said that this one man did more damage to the health of ordinary Americans than any other in history. As a direct result of McGovern’s do-gooding we have experienced an obesity epidemic, with nearly 31% of us overweight. Type 2 diabetes rose from 2.6% to nearly 10% of us today.

So a bad idea takes off, and cannot be stopped even by good science. As Mencken said, “For every complex problem there is a solution that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

I am now 71 years old and long past the time that I could eat and drink anything I wanted without paying a price. All of the above is not meant to convey dietary advice. I am only talking about what I do because it works for me. I want to stay trim and in good health. For readers, take it all with a grain of salt. Ahr ahr.

69 thoughts on “The George McGovern legacy: An equal distribution of poor health”

  1. Fun read!

    I’m 6’0″. Three months ago I weighed 200 lbs. Now I’m 170: Zero carbs except however many are in Romaine, raw spinach, kimchi, and mushrooms. A daily Big Salad. 1-2 pounds of high-quality meat (e.g., grass-fed burgers) daily. Some fat but not much: 1 T mct oil plus 2 T heavy cream in coffee. 16-20 hours of fasting daily.

    It’s mind-blowing how easy it is, and how quickly you get used to it and are rarely hungry.

    Like

    Reply

    2. There’s also such a thing as a ketogenic vegan diet for those who don’t want to consume animal foods for moral or other reasons, although it must be noted that it is pretty restrictive, so proper supervision is needed to ensure long-term health benefits like with any other health-centered diet.

      https://www.ruled.me/comprehensive-guide-vegan-ketogenic-diet/

      https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vegan-keto-diet#what-it-is

      And as for fat, it all stems down to people’s misunderstanding of the subject itself. Just as there’s good and bad bacteria, there’s also fat compounds that are good and bad for human health. The ‘good’ fats are typically found in fresh, natural foods such as dairy, meat, poultry and fatty acids in plant foods like avocados, coconuts, nuts like pistachios and cashews, and seeds like sesame and flaxseed. The bad ones are heavily processed or refined fats such as hydrogenated oils, which are linked to obesity and heart disease in studies such as the ones below:

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27215959/

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9566997/

      https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/hydrogenated-vegetable-oil#side-effects

      Here’s more comprehensive reading on cholesterol itself. It’s seldom mentioned by mainstream pundits that it’s an essential part of the human organism that provides many benefits, at least when consumed in moderation. It is the thing that gives molecular structure to our bodies and boosts healthy development, including cognitively.

      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33471744/

      https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/6/e010401

      https://www.healthline.com/health-news/bad-cholesterol-may-have-bad-rap

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. I should have worked a little harder on the cholesterol angle, and statins. I think they are nothing more than a profit center, and they lead to the need for more drugs to boot, to counter their side effects. Here is one story I read about years ago … a guy was talking to a large group of seniors like me, and told them that out of 100, three would eventually die of heart disease. If all took statins, that number would be reduced to two. However, he said, doctors would have no idea which one would be spared. At that point, people got up and left the room, not offended by the lecture, but by PhRMA and the medical profession that keeps them in business.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. It’s such a scam. I mean, it would be understandable if someone had excessive cholesterol levels in their bodies, but lowering cholesterol in the body far below where it should be is not good, either. Human health is far more nuanced than that.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

        2. How many of the 100 did the guy claim statins would kill. I have this treatment called a bullet which could prevent all 3 dying of heart disease.

          PS liked the article. I reckon you could go over a lot of your old articles (including this one) and add to them. Less people would probably read them but if you are ever struggling for something to write.

          Like

          Reply

    3. I typically follow a flexitarian diet: one that is heavily centered on nutrient-dense plants (ones that are high in fatty acids and protein and low in carbs), with a periodic (every one or two weeks) consumption of tastefully prepared animals foods, typically of good-quality when readily available in my local grocery. Carbs and sugary foodstuffs are rarely eaten (except for special occasions). It works perfectly fine for me, and I feel lighter. It also helps with maintaining my healthy weight. But these are my anecdotes and nothing general, so it may not work well for you. To each their own.

      Like

      Reply

  2. this pyramid was meant for the time of shortage. Back then eating cereals was the most efficient way to feed the masses. It is just now, that we have this enormous overproduction on anything including food. It is so easy for everyone to eat what we consider healthy. It is not expensive. It does not have to be organic either, which is a scam. Just avoid industrial prepared food a.k.a. fast food and make your meals yourself from basic foods. It takes time, which is good, it teaches you to respect what you eat. We order regularly, like once or sometimes twice a week something from takeaway and then we always eat much more than usual, not just because it is convenient but because we don’t see the work behind that food. I still have a clean conscience knowing that it is not our regular way of feeding ourselves. As long as we don’t have other problems…don’t we have a good life?

    Like

    Reply

    1. Indeed. The Climate Change hoax seems intent on eliminating the good life, but CO2 is a boon, a way to feed us all. I read, don’t know where or of course how accurate, that we produce enough food to feed 10 billion. The planet is greening. The point of this stupidity is apparently to stop population growth. Nations of Africa are being denied the very things that made us wealthy, oil, gas and coal, and nuclear (which oddly is “carbon” free). But cheap energy is our way to wealth and comfort. That is what these zealots want to stop.

      Like

      Reply

  3. Keto works but it’s not for everyone and this is how I have learned to maintain my healthy weight.

    First is to learn that hunger is caused by a hormone called Ghrelin and it is increased by stress and lack of sleep. So just because you get hungry you might not need more food. So make sure to get enough sleep and relax.

    Now to lose weight we need to be in a calorie deficit and the key to making this successful is to not be hungry. Not all food is equal when it comes to hunger. Protein and fiber are much more satiating and filling than carbs, while whole grains can be more filling than processed carbs.

    So to make losing or maintaining weight easy we need to get rid of calorie dense foods that aren’t filling. The worst ones are any beverage with calories and the next would be any processed foods that contain fats + carbs (chips. ice-cream, fried foods).

    Mostly I would eat a normal diet of meat, some starchy carbs and vegetables. To reduce the calories you just take away some of the starchy carbs and replace it with more vegetables or use leaner cuts of meat. The vegetables are mostly there just to be a low calorie bulk to keep you full so you don’t overeat. I would also watch out for any condiments that are too high in sugar or fat. Hot sauce, mustard, and fermented veg are great for flavor while being low in calories.

    I no longer need to count calories but I will check out the calorie content of new foods to see if they would be a good fit. Also during covid I invested in a better home gym and needed to gain more weight but I wasn’t hungry. So I had to increase my calories in a way that was easy for me without going overboard and just eating junk food so I just added 200 more calories of healthy fats. It was mentioned in the article that popcorn is a bad food to eat but I have found that airpoped or a very low fat popcorn is a decently filling snack with not being too high in calories, it has lots of volume that will make you feel full and also takes more time to eat than other snacks.

    I think Keto works because it forces people to not eat processed foods and the fat you are eating although high in calories is generally combined with very filling protein.

    TLDR = Sleep + High Protein + High Veg and No Liquid Calories

    Like

    Reply

    1. Keto works because, like perhaps literally no other method, it initiates genuine fat-burning, and that burning tells your brain that you’re not hungry: Because you’re not.

      And it works because, if you do it right, you’re eliminating all grains and sweets, both of which cause systemic inflammation, which disrupts all essential-beneficial processes, including fat loss.

      Focusing on “starchy carbs”—-especially if the goal is fat loss—-is not only counterproductive, it’s probably downright idiotic.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I would avoid engaging in ad hominem here, as Plas makes one overreaching to solid point: It is not as simple as we want it to be. While I avoid starchy vegetables in my food mix, I am currently totally in Keto and stuck at 208, six pounds beyond my goal. I do not understand why. The scale has not budged in over two weeks.

        Like

        Reply

        1. There was no ad hominem.

          If your scale hasn’t moved:

          Reduce carbs even further, plus…
          Increase protein, plus…
          Reduce (but do not eliminate) dietary fat.

          That trifecta usually does the trick.

          Lots of sleep, lots of water, and lots of walking help, too.

          Like

          Reply

            1. Given the lengthy article that you wrote about Keto, dismissing all of your hard work there and offering the suggestion to just go ahead and eat starches is quite disrespectful and also PROBABLY (as I was careful to emphasize) idiotic.

              Like

              Reply

              2. Whatever. I did not set out to write such a lengthy post, but one thing led to another … and I am not chastising you … if you read our commenting policy, you’ll find that we are not hall monitors. Passionate people say aggressive things, and people can take care of themselves. So be it. I just prefer better manners, and I say this as a man who has been banned from far better places than this.

                I’ve been at this a long time, and I like to write. That part is fulfilling, and sometimes my product is well received. Sometimes not. Still the same, I’d rather be doing this than driving a truck, except that trucking pays better. It actually pays, in fact.

                Liked by 1 person

                Reply

        2. The body makes fat to store toxins. You recently had surgeries. The anesthesia and any other medications you took can cause liver damage. The liver processes toxins preferably for excretion, but if the liver is overloaded, then fat is used by the body to keep toxins sequestered to prevent damage to your system.
          The only advice I agree with is to avoid fructose and sucrose. They cause liver damage. So do excess fats.
          The cleanest diet should include adequate animal protein, preferably lean and organic, grass fed. Also starches from organic grains, to provide the body’s ideal fuel, glucose. Soluble fiber is important to stimulate the liver to release toxic bile, and the fiber binds to the bile so it will be excreted. Beans, oats and barley are excellent sources of soluble fiber.
          Be careful to minimize any plant foods that are high in carotenoids. Especially dark green, yellow, orange or red. Eating the rainbow is extremely bad advice. They lie about everything.
          You might enjoy listening to videos that expand on these principle and provide research to back them up.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          2. You know, I found something interesting about this subject as it relates to cancer, which comes from an ‘official’ source. While they still claim that Vitamin A has health benefits (that’s up for debate, of course), between the lines they do admit that it does have it’s downsides and some claims for this “vitamin” aren’t fully back by empirical research.

            “Several prospective and retrospective observational studies in current and former smokers, as well as in people who have never smoked, found that higher intakes of carotenoids, fruits and vegetables, or both are associated with a lower risk of lung cancer [1,23]. However, clinical trials have not shown that supplemental beta-carotene and/or vitamin A helps prevent lung cancer. …. taking very high doses of beta-carotene, with or without 7,500 mcg RAE (25,000 IU) retinyl palmitate or 325 mg aspirin, did not prevent lung cancer. In fact, both the CARET and ATBC studies showed a significant increase in lung cancer risk among study participants taking beta-carotene supplements or beta-carotene and retinyl palmitate supplements.”

            It continues to add that:

            “The evidence on the relationship between beta-carotene and prostate cancer is mixed. CARET study participants who took daily supplements of beta-carotene and retinyl palmitate had a 35% lower risk of nonaggressive prostate cancer than men not taking the supplements [27]. However, the ATBC study found that baseline serum beta-carotene and retinol levels and supplemental beta-carotene had no effect on survival [28]. Moreover, men in the highest quintile of baseline serum retinol levels were 20% more likely to develop prostate cancer than men in the lowest quintile [29].”

            https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminA-HealthProfessional/#h14

            Like

            Reply

            1. Vitamin A is not a vitamin at all. It is literally poison. The myth about the Vit A being essential and causing blindness if not consumed is on par with the myth of polio virus – utter BS.

              Grant Genereux has been talking about it and wrote a couple of books on the subject, see here for more:

              https://ggenereux.blog/my-ebooks/

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

                2. I took some C yesterday in a powdered packet, and it shot through me like a cannon. My body rejected it outright. I’ve noticed that C tablets, 500M, have a similar effect, not as dramatic. As a rule, I take no supplements. I am going back to that rule now.

                  Like

                  Reply

                  1. That’s why I almost never take a vitamin supplement. Plus, there’s no proper regulation to make sure that they’re safe and effective, as Congress deregulated the supplements market in the 1990s. Since then, it has been mired with widespread fraud and illness from its products.

                    Like

                    Reply

                  1. Perhaps that’s the only drawback (depending on your point of view), but otherwise, I think he made a good point about vitamins. He is more accurate when he compared it to other hoaxes like the moon landings, though.

                    Like

                    Reply

            2. The above source also has this much to say about Vitamin A (began-carotene) as it relates to human vision problems in older people (age-related macular degeneration or AMD). Closer reading of the fine print shows it’s not clear-cut, either, just like its role in “treating” cancer isn’t all that it’s cut out to be. In fact, the “began-carotene” mentioned in one large study about vitamin supplementation for vision was a small fraction of the said supplement (15 mg), second only to copper – which was at 2 miligrams, for the pill’s dominating ingredients were Vitamin C (500 mg), Vitamin E (180 mg), and zinc (80 mg). Ultimately, it was demonstrated that Vitamin A alone made no significant improvements to sight in the clinical trial’s human subjects, as those who didn’t take the vitamin still saw their sight improved due to consuming other vitamins or nutrients from what they consumed.

              “The Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS), a large randomized clinical trial, found that participants at high risk of developing advanced AMD …. reduced their risk of developing advanced AMD by 25% by taking a daily supplement containing beta-carotene (15 mg), vitamin E (180 mg [400 IU] dl-alpha-tocopheryl acetate), vitamin C (500 mg), zinc (80 mg), and copper (2 mg) for 5 years compared to participants taking a placebo [30].

              A follow-up AREDS2 study confirmed the value of this supplement in reducing the progression of AMD over a median follow-up period of 5 years …. Importantly, the study revealed that beta-carotene was not a required ingredient; the original AREDS formulation without beta-carotene provided the same protective effect against developing advanced AMD. In a more detailed analysis of results, supplementation with lutein and zeaxanthin reduced the risk of advanced AMD by 26% in participants with the lowest dietary intakes of these two carotenoids who took a supplement containing them compared to those who did not take a supplement with these carotenoids [31]. The risk of advanced AMD was also 18% lower in participants who took the modified AREDS supplement containing lutein and zeaxanthin but not beta-carotene than in participants who took the formulation with beta-carotene but not lutein or zeaxanthin.”

              https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminA-HealthProfessional/#h15

              Lutein + zeaxanthin and omega-3 fatty acids for age-related macular degeneration: the Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) randomized clinical trial (May 2013):

              https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23644932/

              Like

              Reply

        3. Probably, we aren’t meant to be in ketosis the entire year. There are seasons for a reason.

          There’s more than one way to lose weight and to keep losing it, just as there’s more than one way to treat illness outside of allopathy.

          I’d alternate between calorie deficit and keto, to lose more weight. 3 months on, 3 months off. Or I’d increase my exercise level. Or try a different exercise routine.

          It’s easier to go into calorie deficit with food than it is to burn the same number of calories by running 4 miles. Or walking 8.

          Or you could build muscle to burn more fat, by weight training. It’s not the LB number that matters so much, but the muscle to fat ratio.

          A formula that works for losing weight at a plateau, is calorie deficit and increasing exercise simultaneously.

          Interval training burns more calories than going at the same pace. Also, when we put our bodies under stress, during high intensity exercise, we create tons of good hormones, causing beneficial epigenetic changes at the cellular level.

          Like

          Reply

        4. I recently put on some weight and seem to have a ‘new normal’ I suspect it is due to extra muscle bone density blood and possibly greater lung capacity. If you aren’t any fatter I don’t see extra weight as a problem.
          Are you walking lots of hills (I assume you aren’t running at your age)? Hills make me put on weight especially walking them. Even something like sit ups or push ups or lunges will do it. In fact if you let your body and mind work properly I suspect any exercise routine will give you a higher ‘healthy weight’

          Like

          Reply

          1. Thank you! What a nice person! My clothes still fit easily, but in the mirror, I see a bulge over my belt, and I know about mushroom tops. At 202 I do not have that problem. But I take your words seriously.

            Like

            Reply

      2. Finally someone talking sense.

        Ketosis is a much better state for the brain that needs proteins and animal fats anyway.

        Watch the videos by Sten Ekberg and try it out, instead of whining about “ad hominem” BS when finally you get some GOOD advice, Mark…

        Typical rejacts.
        Rejections + knee jerk reactions

        Common, especially with (food) normies.

        https://m.youtube.com/c/drekberg/videos

        Like

        Reply

        1. Ketosis is not a normal state of metabolism. When I tried low carbing, it promptly kicked me into menopause and made me feel much worse. It was a huge mistake.

          Like

          Reply

          1. I beg to differ, as I think ketosis is the natural state for our bodies, from an evolutionary standpoint. It is why we do not have natural “enough” buttons for carbs. In our far distant past, we were primarily meat eaters with only a little supplement from vegetation. Fruits were a rarity, as most of those we have were developed by us.

            Anyway, I have a hard time reconciling onset of menopause with ketosis. Are we perhaps doing correlation=causation? I should advise, not from me but from anyone who follows this, that post-menopausal women do not fare well with Keto. It has to do with lack of estrogen.

            Like

            Reply

              1. How can a diet, intended to reduce the intake of toxins, so relieving the liver of its important task, “wreak havoc” on that same liver?

                That makes no sense whatsoever.

                Ekberg ‘s video about Corona is also good. No matter which theory you embrace; sugar feeds bacteria and parasites, so in any case it is good for your body to heavily reduce them.

                Like

                Reply

                1. low carb/keto diets contain excessive fats. Fats are used to store toxins. The body is designed to use glucose as its primary fuel. Glucose is not a problem, but fructose is.

                  Like

                  Reply

                  2. Different fats just like different plants and different parts of different animals contain different levels of different toxins. Men and women are also different and I would suggest there can be many other differences like taking medication (over different stages of life) like the pill or vaccines or Tylenol. I do believe that consuming toxins (especially vitamin a pig fat or vegetables) makes me fatter for the same weight.

                    Like

                    Reply

                1. Having never before seen a promotional video for a product, and being crude, my first question was “Is he banging her?” No. She is married, he is gay. Could be wrong, as always, and not that there is anything wrong with it, but his wrists told me so.

                  Bone broth is the newest thing? Andy Kaufman is pushing it too. I do like Kettle and Fire bone broth soups, but hell, maybe they are scraping up bones from chicken factories. Maybe all of marketing is a scam.

                  Like

                  Reply

                  1. I don’t think bone broth is the “newest thing”, although I do think these influencers often don’t give their audiences the full picture when it comes to what they push, be it food or anything else. People have been making the concoction long before it became wildly trendy amongst the health-centric crowd and holistic practitioners.

                    With regards to marketing, you do have a point there: in a way, it is a scam because it often relies on selling something that’s not entirely what it sells something to be (expectation vs. reality). However, that doesn’t mean that we can’t get something good out of the bargain, either, if we’re savvy about it.

                    Like

                    Reply

              3. Did you consider that this diet has caused a de-tox reaction which in turn made you feel bad? During the continuous food poisoning, liver suffers the most since it stores most of the toxic weight. As you discontinue poisoning yourself with bad food choices, the liver has finally an opportunity to cleanse itself – it releases the toxins so these could be excreted. While doing so, you’re likely to have the symptoms of poisoning, which correspond to a particular toxin or a mix of them.

                If I were you, I’d eliminate all other possibilities before claiming that a specific diet did a havoc to your body.

                Like

                Reply

                1. It is in the scientific literature that to cause liver damage, one of the things they do is feed rats or mice excess fat. Or fructose. This is known to science, but hidden from the goyim. Nutritional advice, both mainstream and promoted alternative, is designed to keep us sick, infertile, and to make big ag and pharma wealthy.
                  All you need to be healthy is adequate animal protein, grains, beans, and fruits and vegetables in moderation. Many healing diets through the ages emphasized “white” foods to avoid plant toxins.

                  Like

                  Reply

    1. I found, and am not good at this stuff, that it is easy to overlook the maternal line. For instance, and I have no basis for drawing strong conclusions, I found that indeed Sen Jon Tester of Montana has ancestral roots going back to the British peerage, and that yes, he was landed gentry regarding his “farm,” but that his mother held more interest. She was a Pearson (think Lester, Drew), maybe nothing, but she is scrubbed. He ‘s a man of little count, no talent, rising to semi-great heights (Montana?) on no practical achievements. So it goes.

      Like

      Reply

          1. Thanks for sharing. I gladly appreciate the input. And when it comes to the WEF’s goals, absolute control of food production and distribution is one of them (which we pretty much already have, as much of the world’s food supply has been controlled by a couple of large conglomerates for decades such as Cargill and Monsanto.)

            Like

            Reply

      2. Mark, Have you ever thought about writing a “Book” ? You enjoy writing so much and you have a pretty good perception and handle on things in the ways of the world. it would be interesting to read what you’d come up with. if you hit on the right topic ,it could be quite the “Windfall” for the future of your family…maybe even leave a legacy when your gone..Hmm

        Like

        Reply

          1. Yeah, portable document format. anything today electronic stands the chance of “shit”…in the bed. But there’s always still the old fashion way. it’s something to think about.

            Like

            Reply

          1. I know, Thanks, it must have been some kind of glitch. it happens when dealing with electronics. But on another note, getting back to you writing a book. I really do believe you should do it. you spend an awful lot of time here writing and I enjoy reading your writing. But I think you should be putting some of that mindful energy into a side project along side your love for this. You’re not getting any younger, your fingers are getting older…And, I don’t say this lightly, I’m not blowing smoke up your ass or tooting your horn…But you’re a talented guy and writing is your niche. you know how they say, if you find something you love, you’ll never work a day in your life ? I found that in music. I believe everyone is good at something, But sometimes it’s right there in front of them and it’s too close for them to see it. did you ever see the movie “A BRONX TALE” ? There’s a line in it… “The saddest thing in life is a waste of talent”. Well, I believe in that, Don’t let it just pass you by… Go for it.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

      3. The Pearson name could also tie us to education. There is a production company of that name which provides learning materials to students. It went into the digital market in the late ’90s. It was first established in Britain by English businessman Samuel Pearson in 1844.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_Education

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_plc

        https://www.geni.com/people/Samuel-Pearson/6000000004358698208

        In America, there is also a huge push of the nutrition models provided by the USDA in public schools. Their guidelines often shape what pupils are fed in school cafeterias when they’re not in classrooms being programmed, or at least that is true for schools that receive federal funding.

        Like

        Reply

  5. I find it interesting that the changes in American dietary guidelines coincided with massive changes in the agricultural industry (rise in “factory farms”, mono-crops, hazardous pesticides like RoundUp (glyphosate), etc.) Not to mention that popular grain products such as wheat, corn, and soy are heavily subsidized in the United States. With such huge backing by industry giants, that probably explains why grain products took a prominent role in the USDA food pyramid until 2015. Money talks, after all.

    Like

    Reply

  6. Off topic question –

    I foolishly got into a Beatles discussion with someone on fb, casting doubt on the official claims but admitting I haven’t made a study of them or their music.

    Still they’re very intrigued by the idea and want specifics – name names, etc. What are the best papers or sources I could point them toward to investigate further? From here or elsewhere on the web?

    Like

    Reply

      2. Thanks, I’ll check those out. At a glance, they look like they come across as too unhinged, and requiring too much sifting of wheat from chaff, to offer to a “normie”… But maybe can offer with a caveat.

        Like

        Reply

      4. Here’s something interesting that I found:

        “The Stanford Research Institute, adjoining the Hoover Institution, is a $150 million a year operation with 3300 employees. It carries on program surveillance for Bechtel, Kaiser, and 400 other companies, and extensive intelligence operations for the CIA. It is the largest institution on the West Coast promoting mind control and the behavioral sciences.’

        The thirty-three, again. Always the same old marker.

        Like

        Reply

  8. And may I add that when it comes to using edible fats and oils “sparingly”, I think this should primarily be applied on heavily processed or refined fat or oil-based products such as hydrogenated oils, which are known to be incredibly unhealthy for humans.

    Otherwise, there’s no reason to avoid or limit the consumption of natural, healthy oils and fats from both animals and plants that aren’t heavily processed, unless someone is allergic to any or all of them or evidently can’t easily digest any or all of them.

    That’s my two cents.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment