Food Pyramid?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/diet.....ap/index.html

The article pretty much talks about why the food pyramid is crap and why they are replacing it. My question is do you think it will make any difference in how we eat?

I think on the whole, it will not. I know I don't follow the food pyramid at all right now...or ever. I eat what I want and I am skinny as hell. It is due to my genes but even then I must be doing something right to be as skinny and as low weight as I am. I tend to think that the majority of Americans have the same view point that they will eat what ever they want and not really care about the consequences even if they start to put on weight.

For my example of that I will use my parents. They are getting up there in age so it is harder to eat they way they did when they were my age. They don't change their eating habits until they hit a "wall" so to say. Then they at least change their eating habits and workout to burn off the weight. Far too many people don't even do that.

I am at this point just rambling but I would like to hear what everyone here has to say about this move and how much of a differene, if any, this will make.

It seems reasonable enough - whole grain foods, good amounts of fruit and veg, more accurate guidelines as to what a serving is, etc. However, while I'm glad they awknowledged exercise, the guidelines were somewhat flawed in that area:-

"Exercise at least 30 minutes a day to reduce the risk of chronic disease. Increase it to 60 minutes daily to prevent weight gain and up to 90 minutes daily if you've lost weight and want to keep it off."

60 minutes daily to prevent weight gain? Er, and burn off a couple of stone in the process. For an obese person who is not used to exercises or eating particularly healthily (just using an example - not discriminating), I'd say 30 minutes a day or 60 minutes any other day is ample for very considerable weight loss when coupled with a healthy diet. Launching people onto a program like this was never going to be easy, and proposing guidelines like that isn't going to make it any easier.

Well, the nutritional doctors are only letting us know what biology/etc. has determined. And, last I checked, nature didn't take our preferences into account. Then again, we like to ignore things until it's too late to do anything about them.

While I agree Dr. K, I think the program isn't going to really target adults. More or less it will target children in school. I bet I could ask my parents what is on the food pyramid and things like that and they wouldn't have a clue. Getting the word out to adults in general will be hard and after so long you are just stuck in your habits. If you had the will power you would already be exercising and eating reasonably well anyways.

This will effect the future generations.

I like the old system better. It was easier to follow. It was pretty much 1 size fits all. Even an idiot could figure it out, because it was obvious that you should be eating more grains than fats or meats because that brick in the pyramid was bigger. That seems to me to be the way to design a system you want other people to follow. The new on is tougher to follow -- because thediet is different depending on other factors, like general fitness level. How is the average person supposed to know what "moderately active" is? Does it mean "I can run a mile" or "I can walk up 5 flights of stairs without being out of breath"?

Quote:

---

Balance the number of calories you eat with the number you use each day. (To find that number, multiply the number of pounds you weigh now by 15 calories. This represents the average number of calories used in one day if you're moderately active. If you get very little exercise, multiply your weight by 13 instead of 15. Less-active people burn fewer calories.)

Maintain a level of physical activity that keeps you fit and matches the number of calories you eat. Walk or do other activities for at least 30 minutes on most days. To lose weight, do enough activity to use up more calories than you eat every day.

---

Hate to break it to the geniuses that came up with this, but most people aren't going call themselves inactive even if their daily exercise is getting up to get more cheetos.

Quote:

---

Choose fats and oils with 2 grams or less saturated fat per tablespoon, such as liquid and tub margarines, canola oil and olive oil.

---

Well, again nice in theory, but a lot of families have 2 parents working and reading labels probably isn't high on the list.

Quote:

---

Limit foods high in saturated fat, trans fat and/or cholesterol, such as full-fat milk products, fatty meats, tropical oils, partially hydrogenated vegetable oils and egg yolks. Instead choose foods low in saturated fat, trans fat and cholesterol from the first four points above.

---

I'd be willing to say there are quite a few overweight Americans who have very little idea of what a trans-fat is, considering the AHA had to define it. And there is no ingredient listing or labeling that says Trans-Fat, or Trans-Fatty Acids, so unless there's list somewhere that tells consumers what ingredients to look out for, this isn't going to do much good.

Compare that to the old system:

Quote:

---

* Grain 6-11 servings

---

Pretty simple. Even if you are a complete moron you can figure out what grains are, and it doesn't make the busy woman rushing through the store on her way home from work worry about "trans-fat", and activity levels for the entire family just to get a reasonably heathly meal prepared for her family. Grain = bread/rice/potatoes. Not complicated. No need to do advanced differential calculus to figure out just how much rice you should get for the family. "Jee, Johnny's overweight, but Suzy is underweight. I haven't done a sit-up in 20 years, but hubby runs 10 miles a day", so Johnny gets a hlf cup of rice, Suzy gets a cup and a half, I should only eat a cup, and hubby should get 2 cups. That's 4 cups. Now for the proteins ... way to much work to figure out, especially if we are working more hours now than we were in 1995 when the pyramid came out.

Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather see a less exact system that the average person can follow easily than an exact system that gets ignored because it takes too long to figure out how to make a simple meal.

http://www.usda.gov/cnpp/pyrabklt.pdf (The older system)
http://www.americanheart.org/present...dentifier=1330 (new system)

From what I gather, they believe that people don't follow the current system at all because of it's vaugeness. 6-11 Servings of grain and 2 servings of meat? So is that six slices of bread and 2 T-Bone steaks? That is how a lot of people read it. It is TOO mysterious to people. People don't have to follow it exactly but they want people to have an idea of what they are talking about. NO ONE will actually sit there and measure everything.

I agree the new system has flaws but I like it a lot more that the system of the past.

As someone who wants to be a nutrionist I'm going to give you the facts.

The goverment WANTS you to be unhealthy.

Think about it, the sicker you are the more you have to work to pay off your medical bills, you're stuck in a peverbal cycle of confusion and ignorance and a slave to the capitalistic devil.

There is absolutely no good reason to consume starches, none, they don't offer no nutrients that meat or vegitables couldn't do better. Fruits arn't all that great either, #1: They do selective breeding picking and raising the most sugary among them and #2: Vitamic C is relativly easy to get. One orange (90 kilocalories, 90% of your C needs.) or better yet, a juiced lemon with a spoonful of Splenda, (24 kilocalories, 120% of your C needs.) will do the job. Pttassium is always been asscosiated with sugar-filled bannanas, potatoes have more and if you want less carbs entirely go for salmon or tuna. Infact salmon and tuna are perhaps some of the best foods you could ever eat.

Oh and for those that believe Chinease people live off rice: You're just as stereotypical as the guy who says blacks love fried chicken, most Chinease people eat maybe a small bowl of rice or sprinkle it on a platter. Infact go to a Chinease resturant and you'll find Asians eat more of the "shrimp chou-mein" or "Buddha delight" instead of fried rice with eggrolls. And those two dishes i meationed are made up of steamed vegitables and seafood.

How can carbohydrates be a vital energy source? All carbohydrates turn to sugar in your system and don't we not know the dangers of too much sugar? Put a tooth in a bowl of soda and watch it dissolve, now immagine that tooth was your innards. Use your common sense people!

And fiber, what's so great about fiber? It helps you crap, guess what, so do fatty acids cause they grease up your intenstines, also fiber can be getten in much more and better qauntities like green beans and salad instead of brown rice and whole wheat bread, but they don't just come out and tell you this because they want you to perceive starches as "yummy health food" and vegitables as "yucky health food". Vegitables are not a nesscary evil, they are an organic and quite important source of our daily functions. And yet in every diet-plan they always play second fiddle, WHY?!

It's all a scheme to keep you down don't you get it?! I'd do more to unveil the truth of all these "scientists" and "dieticians" but frankly I'm a cynical bastard who believes most people deserve to live a lie.

Exscersise: Any amount you do is good, it burns kilocalories and develops muscle tone. There's no fixed level, the more the better.

I believe Dr.Atkins was onto something with his diet-plan, I don't know if I believe in "keotosis" or that there's any good excuse to eat porkrines and butter, but the fact of the matter is fat is as organic of an energy for us as wind/solar power is for our technology. Carbohydrates are like the coal of energy. Yes thier cheap and pletiful, but are you willing to pay the price?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harvest Moon

As someone who wants to be a nutrionist I'm going to give you the facts.

The goverment WANTS you to be unhealthy.

Think about it, the sicker you are the more you have to work to pay off your medical bills, you're stuck in a peverbal cycle of confusion and ignorance and a slave to the capitalistic devil.

There is absolutely no good reason to consume starches, none, they don't offer no nutrients that meat or vegitables couldn't do better. Fruits arn't all that great either, #1: They do selective breeding picking and raising the most sugary among them and #2: Vitamic C is relativly easy to get. One orange (90 kilocalories, 90% of your C needs.) or better yet, a juiced lemon with a spoonful of Splenda, (24 kilocalories, 120% of your C needs.) will do the job. Pttassium is always been asscosiated with sugar-filled bannanas, potatoes have more and if you want less carbs entirely go for salmon or tuna. Infact salmon and tuna are perhaps some of the best foods you could ever eat.

Oh and for those that believe Chinease people live off rice: You're just as stereotypical as the guy who says blacks love fried chicken, most Chinease people eat maybe a small bowl of rice or sprinkle it on a platter. Infact go to a Chinease resturant and you'll find Asians eat more of the "shrimp chou-mein" or "Buddha delight" instead of fried rice with eggrolls. And those two dishes i meationed are made up of steamed vegitables and seafood.

How can carbohydrates be a vital energy source? All carbohydrates turn to sugar in your system and don't we not know the dangers of too much sugar? Put a tooth in a bowl of soda and watch it dissolve, now immagine that tooth was your innards. Use your common sense people!

And fiber, what's so great about fiber? It helps you crap, guess what, so do fatty acids cause they grease up your intenstines, also fiber can be getten in much more and better qauntities like green beans and salad instead of brown rice and whole wheat bread, but they don't just come out and tell you this because they want you to perceive starches as "yummy health food" and vegitables as "yucky health food". Vegitables are not a nesscary evil, they are an organic and quite important source of our daily functions. And yet in every diet-plan they always play second fiddle, WHY?!

It's all a scheme to keep you down don't you get it?! I'd do more to unveil the truth of all these "scientists" and "dieticians" but frankly I'm a cynical bastard who believes most people deserve to live a lie.

Exscersise: Any amount you do is good, it burns kilocalories and develops muscle tone. There's no fixed level, the more the better.

I believe Dr.Atkins was onto something with his diet-plan, I don't know if I believe in "keotosis" or that there's any good excuse to eat porkrines and butter, but the fact of the matter is fat is as organic of an energy for us as wind/solar power is for our technology. Carbohydrates are like the coal of energy. Yes thier cheap and pletiful, but are you willing to pay the price?

---

Do you have a source on this conspiracy?

http://www.landry.com/low-carb-danger.htm
some of the dangers of low carb diets

and before you start calling this guy a quack
http://www.landry.com/agl.htm

At any rate, the problem with the old system is that people were counting Wonder Bread and milled white rice and other milled grain with no nutrients as "healthy grains". Whole grains are not that bad. eat whole grain whole wheat bread, not white bread and certainly not cookies. You are right that veggies are probably the best thing out there to eat, but if you aren't eating crap-grains like white bread, white rice and potatoes, they aren't going to make you less healthy.

Not in defense of Atkins, the diet isn't about eating Pork Rinds and Butter, I don't even know where you get that. The diet calls for eating a balanced diet and *low-fat meats*. There is 30+ years or research saying that a high fat diet is a factor in heart attacks and strokes. Now that isn't what Atkins is advocating, but frankly, that's how most people perceive it.

nutrition is very simple. it's like accountancy. burn more than you put in = weight loss. burn the same as you put in = no weightloss or gain. burn less then you put in = weight gain.

I KNEW you'd say "white is not alright!" as the defence for starches..

The only differance between white rice/white bread to whole wheat counterparts is LESS THEN!

Less carbohydrates..
Less protien..
Less fat..
Less fiber..
Less everything..

THAT'S IT!

But they react the same way in your body and contain the same exact micronutrients. We're bassicaly right back where we started. You have either been brainwashed by the media or are in cahoots with thier destructive plan, I don't know. But I don't need no bombs around me..

And about Atkins, the Atkins company derives that lean cut meat and balanced portions bladdy bladdy blah. Dr. Robert Atkins is dead so he can't speak on behalf. But the whole point of his diet was to shock your body into using fat as primary fuel which would cut your belly off faster, make your brain run 25% more efficently, and make you feel more energetic and overall better. Atleast this is what he predicted.

And despite the fallacies of heart disease and aurtery clogging I have to agree, oils and butter are probably better for you then sugar. Atleast those fats have essential omega acids needed for brain develop (90% of your brain is nonsaturated fat.) and proper harmone growth and retention..

High cholesterol is very rarely seen in men and can be dealt with fairly simpley.

High blood preassure is hardly as big a threat as perceived..

And diabetease is caused by the body unable to respond to rising and lowering blood sugar levels properly, caused primarily do to too many sugar subjection to begin with!

*groans* Chinese people eat rice with every single meal. In large heaps, actually.

And I don't think I've ever met a black guy that doesn't like fried chicken.

...

In fact, I don't think I've met anybody who doesn't like fried chicken. I mean, really, who doesn't like fried chicken? That stuff is great.

Except for vegitarians and such, I mean.