Mon, Oct-18-10, 10:05
|
|
Every moment is NOW.
Posts: 23,064
|
|
Plan: LC (ketogenic)
Stats: 520/381/280
BF: Why yes it is.
Progress: 58%
Location: Ozarks USA
|
|
Well, after I did a massive supplementation for quite some time, I had some better results after that, than I had had before that.
So, although I find Matt mostly a source of humor -- he is such an archetype of the young man, in some respects -- I actually think that the "base idea" -- that malnutrition may be part of much of this, and that greatly increasing a whole spectrum of that nutrition might be helpful -- may have merit.
I think the problem is that
a) eating more of the same doesn't help, and
b) your tastes alone suggest that the things you eat vs. don't probably follow the same general patterns they always have,
c) eating stuff that has grains, sugars, too many carbs, etc. just has too many other side effects to be healthy,
d) it's possible most people significantly overweight esp. for a long time are simply too far gone for the 'gentle' approach of 'correction of course' to be functional, and they may need more direct intervention such as a medication for awhile.
The theory of needing a good dose of a wide spectrum of all kinds of nutrients does not necessarily hinge on eating everything in sight.
And while I expect we'd all agree that food is a far better source of nutrients than pills, there's a lot of stuff in 'foods' like plants that counteract much of their assumed value, and there's lots of stuff that isn't in them at all due to modern agri practices and soil depletion, and there's a lot of stuff that isn't in them because we don't really have as broad a palate as most of us think and our options just aren't covering it, and there's only so much food you can eat at once anyway -- so much like sometimes there is a place for medication, I think sometimes there is a place for supplementation.
The idea at base though is ok. I think the implementation is open to question.
PJ
|