Don't read this if you are not a low carber. Don't reply.

I'm frigging sick and tired of hearing about meals dripping in sugar and starches as "healthy" just because they are low fat. So I've gone on the offensive on boards such as foodnetwork.com. I'm not nasty. I mearly describe the recipe I provide as "low carb and healthy."

Let's face it, we are all somewhat brainwashed by continually hearing about "healthy" low fat eating. How many times do we get a chance to say, yeah?? says who??

It's time to fight back!!! Every time you post a great tasting LC recipe...call it healthy. Every time you hear about a "healthy" starch sensation....well...you decide. We all have our style of saying "it just ain't so."

Healthy And Balanced

Wa'il

What i don't get is if you eat steak and chips you are eating a healthy "balanced" meal. Eat steak and salad you are eating an unhealthy diet and probably not enough fibre!

Ever notice that the "recommended" amount of fiber is very nearly impossible to eat without consuming grains or fiber supplements? Makes you go hmmmmm....

Bravo wizzle!

The other day I was watching the fitness channel. They happened to have a show featuring a guy who wanted to get in shape for a boating, and so they set him up with a dietician. I could tell just by looking at her she was a complete low-fad drone, and she soon proved I was absolutely right. She said she was going to start him right away on eating more grains and complex carbs. She then proceeded to fix him a meal with zero fat, zero animal protein (and not much in the way of veggie protein either), loaded with high glycemic and high carb food like corn and garbanzo beans. She asked him what he thought of the meal, and he responded "it is loaded with carbs". She responded to that "but it's healthy, good carbs". He then tasted, and said he could definitely live with it.

I turned the TV off at this point, because I knew the guy (who was apple shapped and likely had some degree of insulin problems) was being lied to and would probably have done way better on carb control.

Tell me. Why is it considered healthy and balanced to eat a bucket of sugar (corn and legumes) with no major or minor antioxidants, no fat, and almost no protein, but eating the exact opposite meal is said to give you a heart attack?

VERY frustrating indeed.

Whatever affects insulin in a negative way will also affect cholesterol and triglycerides in a negative way. Whatever affects insulin in a negative way will also cause heart disease. Carbs and sugars affect insulin in a negative way. Therefore fat does not make you fat.

What I still don't get is how grains have become a nutrition star? It barely has any nutrients. Yet, every dietician, nutritionist or whatever out there keeps saying, "eat grains."

Am I missing something? What is so nutritious about grains?

That's a good question. As any botanist knows, these are primarily starch. I think the answer has to do with ideology more than science.

Realistically, I can't see them questioning the value of their precious grains until sometime after they finally get over the "fat-is-bad" myth. And we see how much resistance remains to THAT.

If you get right down to it, didn't grains become a staple because they are inexpensive compared to animal-based diets, not necessarily better for you? An acre of grains can produce more calories less expensively than an acre of grazing animals. It was probably more about feeding populations less expensively than it was feeding them better.

At this point, it's about economics of course. It's just that the nutritionist community is still pretty dogmatic. The medical community is really coming around in my opinion, since they're closer to the results of low carb diets than nutritionists are.

Why don't the agribusinesses that are so worried about being able to sell their crops just feed it to the animals and let us eat the animals in peace. I know, I know. Not enough of a mark-up!

"Why don't the agribusinesses that are so worried about being able to sell their crops just feed it to the animals and let us eat the animals in peace. I know, I know. Not enough of a mark-up!"

Oddly enough, none of our basic food animals are actually designed to eat grain. Grazing animals, for example, will thrive naturally on grass, and during part of the year, on whatever seeds the grasses may produce. But NO grazing animal ever eats just pure seeds (grains). And corn? How would a cow eat corn, unless we ran it through a harvester and machinery first to strip off the kernels?

In fact, I don't know of any animals (mice? voles? rats?) who would eat PRIMARILY grains in their natural habitat.

Go to a health food store, or to Whole Foods sometime and check out the UNGROUND wheat 'berries' as they call them. Try to eat a handful of them. Like eating woodchips or stones. Doesn't sound like a natural human food to me. You have to do all sorts of soaking, fermenting, pounding, cooking, and fussing to make them edible at all.

They do fuss a lot about "whole grains" when hardly anyone eats them. Who boils up bulgur for breakfast? How much whole wheat is in that "whole wheat" bread? And how much whole grain is in the pasta and rice that is a mainstay of that famous pyramid?
So the original, idealized, idea behind low fat that was people would eat more whole grains and vegetables, only NO ONE DID.
This idealized diet is what they are pushing. The ultimate expression of it is Dean Ornish's plan. However, in studies the Ornish plan doesn't work as well at Atkins does.
And I can say from the experience of a close friend who tried Ornish, Atkins is a lot easier to stick to.
But in their minds, Atkin's can't work. They would have to let go of what they have been told for years.
And a lot of people can't do that.

whoever pushes grains must believe "if it tastes bad, it must be good for you"

Perfect example: wild rice

Give me a steak and green beans dripping in butter ANYTIME

>>"They do fuss a lot about "whole grains" when hardly anyone eats them. Who boils up bulgur for breakfast?"

Yeah! One thing that kills me is that nutritionists yell, "whole grains!" and then push whole wheat bread, etc. Hell-OH: the "whole" in whole grain means "in one piece." If it's been ground into flour, it's not whole!

What I don't get is that many people seem to value the "extreme virtue" - to the point of being diefied - of grains above valuing the nutrition of vegetables and protein.

It must be all this "staff of life" stuff that's been in our faces for years along with the low-faD trend.

I'm with nikkil. A nice lamb chop with some green beans is where it's at!

Karen