Sun, Aug-04-13, 19:56
|
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
|
|
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by akman
Actually, I think quite the opposite. Agriculture and world commerce caused an abrupt decline in RS intake.
|
My last post just made me think about your idea again. Let's use the premise that the Atkins diet (or any good low-carb diet) is equivalent to an HG diet in all things that are pertinent. Mostly whole foods, few refined carbs, few digestible carbs, some fiber, lots of fat, fresh meat, etc. Now let's see how much RS is in a typical Atkins menu, and we get our optimal amount of RS. Better yet, how about one of us who does Atkins give us a typical daily menu and figure out RS content from that. That's a much better test of RS than just RS-exclusive experiments because it's a test of an entire diet which is known to return us to - and keep us in - good health, including our gut.
I don't know how much RS is found in a typical Atkins menu, but my guess is not much at all, a few grams or something. If that's right, then my anticipated conclusion is that it's very difficult to argue any significant benefit from such a small quantity of RS compared to other substances which are known to bring much more significant benefits to the entire body, mostly because they are either not there (refined carbs) or are there in significant quantities (fat).
The logic here is that if RS is indeed beneficial, then its effect would show up even if the overall diet is already so beneficial to begin with.
Last edited by M Levac : Sun, Aug-04-13 at 20:02.
|