Quote:
Originally Posted by addict1000
The ideas that I think should be discussed within the framework of sustainable are:
Is the approach healthy for the average population over the long term?
Is it an effective method for weightloss and maintenance?
I meant the topic to be a broad discussion of the benefits and/or detriments.
|
I had a hunch that is what you meant.
My opinion, which is more important to me, than anyone else's, is:
There are many effective methods for weightloss.
There are fewer effective methods for maintenance.
The proof is all around us. The majority of people find ways to lose weight, only to find themselves gaining it all back. The "Diet" industry thrives on people looking for the "magic bullet" which is so ellusive.....
The word "Diet" has been so manipulated that if you ask 100 people what it means, you'd probably get about 100 different answers. The saddest part is that most of the answers would not connect diet with health, but rather just connect diet with weight loss.
I suppose anything is sustainable if someone is psychologically prepared and determined to ride the tide to the end, but that doesn't prove anything, really.... Sustainable ways of eating long term, be it "zero carb" or anything else is not healthy if it is not nutritionally balanced.
Now, what the hec does "nutritionally balanced" mean? It has to mean something in relation to having better health, or it has no meaning or purpose. Can nutrition be balanced if we know that there are proteins, carbohydrates and fats and we choose to exclude one of them? I don't think so.
Some people argue that our ancestors didn't eat this or that food, so in terms of evolution, we are not prepared to eat a certain way. Thus, whatever they believe the ancestors did or didn't eat, they justify their diet on that belief.
Doesn't it seem plausible that people 10,000 years ago might have had a problem eating the way that people 10,000 years before them were eating?
Proving nutritional balance to anyone wanting to learn to improve on the way they eat is about as difficult as proving that God exists to an atheist, so even if I know what nutritional balance is, I know I don't want to spend my time trying to prove it as that would be such a futile effort.
We have so many false notions, that it makes it difficult to obtain weight loss through eating in a healthy way. Probably the biggest false notion is that we are all so different and not one diet fits all. The truth is, we've all eaten so differently, we've made it almost impossible to see what a proper way of eating should be.
I have a theory. It might be based in science, it might be based in mythology, I don't know. It is just my theory and it may resemble what someone else may have claimed but that doesn't matter.... Here is my theory:
We should eat food. We should remain as active as we can to maintain our bodily functions. We should get sufficient rest and sleep.
We should not eliminate any food from our diet. We should not fail to remain active when we are capable of doing so. We should not do without sufficient rest and sleep.
We do not need to study endlessly to learn about how we should eat. We do not need to learn any new tricks on best methods of exercise or staying active. We do not need to do anything that is out of the ordinary to have health.
Our goal should be to obtain and maintain health. By achieving proper health, our bodies will automatically achieve what it perceives to be our proper weight. We should never diet for the sole purpose of weight loss.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, Addict1000, that should stimulate some conversation.....