Wow, my admittedly incendiary post certainly got a lot of you hot under the collar! Interesting so many feel so defensive on the subject. And I guess I am a troll, if a definition of troll is someone who doesn't belong on a board, is new and not 'a member' in the fullest sense of the word. Boards are always cosy places where people who feel they 'know' the others can hang out with the like minded.
I guess I'm just a contrarian at heart, been arguing all my life with people who seem to hold fixed ideas.
My point about religion is valid because it was my first impression on arriving here. I sensed [with no preconceived ideas] an air of devotee, about many of the posts and threads, and certainly something as aberated as anti-carbohydrates - the basis of most diets around the world, especially the poor - would have to be a matter of faith.
Some of the posters here should take stock of themselves, they are sounding quite deranged [view of outsider, think about it], and should perhaps read my original post again [I'm sorry if big paragraphs are difficult for some, I'm trying to chop it up into easily digestible bits!
I had no intention to criticise or put down, it's just that the ethos of anti-carbs gives rise to so many arguments against, I barely know where to start [and my post wasn't the definitive argument by any means].
Fact: If a group of small children is left to help themselves to a wide range of foodstuffs over a sufficient period of time, they choose a balanced diet composed of all the foods that are habitually eaten, in other words they balance their nutritional intake and that includes carbohydrates - your villain of the piece. The same is true of other primate young such as orang utans. This would suggest that we need all these foods in order to stay healthy. Our body tells us what we need to eat [allied to this is the well observed phenomenon of people who have had a liver transplant desiring foods they have never eaten but which the donor ate a lot of]. Our organs send messages about their needs, the brain is central processor, not dictator.
The rich world/poor world issue re meat is valid as rich countries eat much more meat which is wasteful to rear, taking many acres to grow a relatively small amount of food which would otherwise produce vast amounts of vegetable food. This is beyond dispute. The Japanese are starting to suffer the diet related diseases of the developed western world as their diet changes from mostly rice [carb!] to more meat and saturated fats, refined sugars etc.
Notice I have not mentioned till now the suffering of sentient animals whose lives are blighted by man, and whose deaths feed your addiction. I am not from Peta, nor from anywhere else which has a 'stance', I am merely me. I don't personally eat mammals, they are too like me for me to feel comfortable with it, it would feel like canibalism - should I also eat dog? My dog? How about unwanted babies, all that protein going to waste. How about human road kill, why waste the protein burying it?
I live in an area in which farming of animals is the major way of making a living, I see how they are treated, I see their confused, scared, apprehensive young faces as they are trucked around the roads to the slaughter house, I see the liquid shit pouring from the trucks as they empty their bowels in fear. I'm a victim of my own sensitivity I know. I couldn't separate this from the nice clean steak in the supermarket, all vacuum plastic wrapped hygene. I respect the honesty of those meat eaters who either rear and kill their own animals, or who go out and shoot their meat. The rest is hypocrisy.
I occasionally eat free range chicken, it forms a very small part of my diet. So I'm no rabid veggie, I do think that far too many people eat far too much meat though, and the results are all around me, obese people waddling along to the next mouth watering fix.
Obviously a very few people have medical conditions that can cause obesity and I am sympathetic to them, and anyone who goes into a coma from eating carbohydrates is clearly one of them. But that's another matter entirely, and applies to very few, the majority who are overweight are eating too much. Of course you can find an occasional fat vegetarian, I knew one once. He was a cook, and loved his food, which he ate far too much of every day. But the majority of vegetarians aren't fat, it's a simple observable fact.
As to why I should spend time posting here, a good point as I doubt I stand a chance of converting anyone, but I do love a good argument. The clash of ideas is meat and drink to me!
I think the underlying problem is taste. Foods are made so tasty that people get addicted to the sensations, they want more, it is, as the saying goes, very morish. That's why manufacturers add refined sugars, salt, MSG and other flavours to their processed food, they want people to keep coming back for more and making them more profits. Capitalism at its best! And slowly the idea of what constitutes a normal portion tends to rise. I have been astonished, horrified even, at the amount of food some pile on their plates, and then consume. Twice what I find acceptable, but then I haven't stretched my stomach out to resemble an eight month pregnancy.
Having gone on for far too long, I will just add that the best way to both lose weight and detoxify your body is to go on a diet of brown rice, highly nutritious and non fattening, and, after you get over the lack of over-the-top taste sensations, subtlely tasty. Stick on that for a couple of weeks and you'll lose easily as much as you could ever do on no-carb and you'll feel incredibly healthy and alive.
|
Your respect is appreciated 
Linear Mode
