On 14 Feb 2006 06:56:49 -0800, TC wrote in
<news:[email protected]> on
sci.med.nutrition :
[...]
> Whether the problem is fundamental in the nature of the calorie theory
> or in the unwieldliness of the food/calorie quantification
> estimations/average or in the day to day estimations of the caloric
> contents of a given plate of food, IT DOES NOT WORK. For all practical
> purposes, counting calories do not work. Period.
Actually, I am not interested in calories as such.
I am intersted in calories "per satiating meal".
For instance, fruit juices may have a few calories but they are half
as filling as whole fruits rich in fiber.
On the other hand, fresh whipped cream or walnuts are packed with fat
and calories but it seems to me they are rather satiating, so the
calories "per satiety" ratio is not high.
I guess rye bread and rolled oats have a favourable ratio too.
TC wrote:
> Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
> > TC wrote:
> > > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
> > > > TC wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Are you still on the low fat bandwagon?
> > > >
> > > > I do NOT have any pet issues.
> > >
> > > Yes or no would suffice. Afraid to own up to the fact that you've been
> > > wrong all this time.
> >
> > I am right, and you are an ****!
> >
> > How many times do I have to say this, Dolt?
> >
> > If I advocate any particular diet, I advocate the Cretan Mediterranean
> > Diet. The original Cretan Mediterranean Diet is a high fat 40% fat
> > diet The recommended version for sedentary people, like yourself, is
> > 30% fat.
> >
> > Any fool who knows anything at all about nutrition knows that it is a
> > person's activity level that determines the level of fat in their diet
> > that they can safely consume. Americans do not do physically demanding
> > work all day long. Ergo, the recommended diet is 30% fat. There is
> > one big exception, however. If you suffer from Syndrom-X, or are sugar
> > sensitive, then it is 35% fat with 5% more protein.
>
> Why does ones activity level affect the level of fat they can safely
> consume? Why is this the case? Are you talking about safely consuming
> without weight gain, or safely consume without the appearance of
> chronic disease, or both?
>
> I don't think you know what you just said. Nor can you prove it.
>
> >
> > My dietary recommendations have been published and have not changed in
> > over 4 years.
>
> So you advocate restricting fat intake, albeit based on activity levels
> for some strange and unexplained reasons.
>
> Please explain how Inuits and Eskimos ate up to 90% or more of their
> diets as fats and still were very healthy, even in their long sedentary
> winter months.
>
> Would you recommend that they have restricted their fat intake to 30%?
> And for what advantage?
>
> >
> > I have a web site on this. Read it, dumb ****!
> >
> > Just thought that you might want to know.
> > --
> > John Gohde,
> > Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!
>
> Achieving good health is not repeating by rote what you found in some
> book somewhere either.
Hey Moron!
How many times do I have to tell you, that you are an ****!
You are a nobody. You are just a village idiot.
I don't have to prove anything to an **** like you.
You just put in writing yet again, just how little you know about
nutrition.
--
John Gohde,
Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!
The nutrition of eating a healthy diet is a biological factor of the
mind-body connection. Weighing in at 17 web pages, The Nutrition of a
Healthy Diet ( http://naturalhealthperspective.com/food/ ) is now with
more documentation and sharper terminology than ever before.
If that is what you think of me, then I must be doing something right.
Now if you thought my ideas were right, then I'd worry about where I
went wrong. Your rejection of my POV is proof that I'm on the right
track.
TC
Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
> TC wrote:
> > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
> > > TC wrote:
> > > > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
> > > > > TC wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Are you still on the low fat bandwagon?
> > > > >
> > > > > I do NOT have any pet issues.
> > > >
> > > > Yes or no would suffice. Afraid to own up to the fact that you've been
> > > > wrong all this time.
> > >
> > > I am right, and you are an ****!
> > >
> > > How many times do I have to say this, Dolt?
> > >
> > > If I advocate any particular diet, I advocate the Cretan Mediterranean
> > > Diet. The original Cretan Mediterranean Diet is a high fat 40% fat
> > > diet The recommended version for sedentary people, like yourself, is
> > > 30% fat.
> > >
> > > Any fool who knows anything at all about nutrition knows that it is a
> > > person's activity level that determines the level of fat in their diet
> > > that they can safely consume. Americans do not do physically demanding
> > > work all day long. Ergo, the recommended diet is 30% fat. There is
> > > one big exception, however. If you suffer from Syndrom-X, or are sugar
> > > sensitive, then it is 35% fat with 5% more protein.
> >
> > Why does ones activity level affect the level of fat they can safely
> > consume? Why is this the case? Are you talking about safely consuming
> > without weight gain, or safely consume without the appearance of
> > chronic disease, or both?
> >
> > I don't think you know what you just said. Nor can you prove it.
> >
> > >
> > > My dietary recommendations have been published and have not changed in
> > > over 4 years.
> >
> > So you advocate restricting fat intake, albeit based on activity levels
> > for some strange and unexplained reasons.
> >
> > Please explain how Inuits and Eskimos ate up to 90% or more of their
> > diets as fats and still were very healthy, even in their long sedentary
> > winter months.
> >
> > Would you recommend that they have restricted their fat intake to 30%?
> > And for what advantage?
> >
> > >
> > > I have a web site on this. Read it, dumb ****!
> > >
> > > Just thought that you might want to know.
> > > --
> > > John Gohde,
> > > Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!
> >
> > Achieving good health is not repeating by rote what you found in some
> > book somewhere either.
>
> Hey Moron!
>
> How many times do I have to tell you, that you are an ****!
>
> You are a nobody. You are just a village idiot.
>
> I don't have to prove anything to an **** like you.
>
> You just put in writing yet again, just how little you know about
> nutrition.
> --
> John Gohde,
> Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!
>
> The nutrition of eating a healthy diet is a biological factor of the
> mind-body connection. Weighing in at 17 web pages, The Nutrition of a
> Healthy Diet ( http://naturalhealthperspective.com/food/ ) is now with
> more documentation and sharper terminology than ever before.
