"Healthiest Hearts In The World Found"

M

member 2106

Guest
'Healthiest hearts in the world' found - BBC News

"72% of calories come from carbohydrates compared with 52% in the US
14% from fat compared with 34% in the US, Tsimane also consume much less saturated fat
Both Americans and Tsimane have 14% of calories from protein, but Tsimane have more lean meat."
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
10,501
correlations are dangerous. I'm sure their diet is excellent. But 2/3 have worms. And they have a very high inflammatory load from disease and parasites.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
"Most of the rest comes from family farms growing rice, maize, manioc root (like sweet potato) and plantains (similar to banana)"

Cassava FTW.

"The Tsimane get 72% of their energy from carbohydrates."

Nobody wants to use that dirty word starch. Just "carbohydrates."

but muh persorption tho, but muh endotoxin tho, but muh insulin tho..

.

 
Last edited:

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
I am always a bit wary when I see hit pieces on protein in diets. There are strong political forces that want to get people to reduce protein consumption, mainly environmental and economic. Soy is cheaper than steak and is claimed to have a lower carbon footprint. Soylent green is even cheaper than soy. @haidut posted a study some time back that claimed that a low protein diet showed increased longevity in mice except for the fact that they had spiked the high protein diet with an incredibly large amount of methionine. Non scientific motives would be the only reason I can see for doing something so blatantly fraudulent.
edit: I just realized that they are pushing low fat here but I am still leery of the motives of the MSM.
 
Last edited:

artlange

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
213
the US diet contains a load of PUFA, and maybe that is the reason for the increased heart problems (due to thyroid suppredssion) while the native population diet probably had very low PUFA. this difference makes epidemioloical studies like this very unhelpful.
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
the US diet contains a load of PUFA, and maybe that is the reason for the increased heart problems (due to thyroid suppredssion) while the native population diet probably had very low PUFA. this difference makes epidemioloical studies like this very unhelpful.
No i think observational studies are very useful. Example "fruits make you fat" ok let's go kitava...
Or "milk make your sick" ok let's go to alpes or Kenya...
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
Observational studies allows to disprove too general statements "carbs make you fat" loooooooool
(Could someone rich here can pay to Gary Taubes a travel to asia please?) or refine arguments. Meat eaters clogs their arteries mcdougall ? Ahah the best heart on earth are from fish/meat eaters
 

artlange

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
213
Observational studies allows to disprove too general statements "carbs make you fat" loooooooool
(Could someone rich here can pay to Gary Taubes a travel to asia please?) or refine arguments. Meat eaters clogs their arteries mcdougall ? Ahah the best heart on earth are from fish/meat eaters
It is very unlikely that an uncontrolled observational study can "prove" anything. It can hint at some conclusion but "proof" requires much more than an observational study. Unless you believe in junk science, in which case, there a lot of observational studies that you might find convincing.
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
Observational studies dont prove anything but can easily disprove.
I this case it disprove vegan hysteria à la mcdougall (meat causes heart disease etc)
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
Observational studies dont prove anything but can easily disprove.
I this case it disproves vegan hysteria à la mcdougall (meat causes heart disease etc)

For more information, please read Karl popper and the black swann argument.
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
If i was really strict i would mention the genetics argument but we have so Many populations who live Healthy with bit of meat/fish plus lot of plant foods and ton of walk that i didnt.
 

lvysaur

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
2,286
I am always a bit wary when I see hit pieces on protein in diets. There are strong political forces that want to get people to reduce protein consumption, mainly environmental and economic.

I'm pretty sure Ray doesn't favor the amount of meat that Americans consume.

Nor does reality, really.
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
I am always a bit wary when I see hit pieces on protein in diets. There are strong political forces that want to get people to reduce protein consumption, mainly environmental and economic.

Thank you for your comment but frankly, i'm a bit weary of the "political forces" or "industry " argument regarding nutrition or a study That causes discomfort.

I Would say That the industry argument is the poorest one. You can shoot it when There are no solid background for the defence (i dont say it's thé cas for you, i have respect for you).

When vegan is losing a debate "but but meat industry" a low carber "but but but grain industry" or taubes "but, but,but sugar industry" ok guys, industry wants to sell you products. Great information here. "But but but They finance studies!". Yeah, the other camp too.

If they can continue to sell you products , it's because the data is unclear. When data is clear "transfat is bad", every scientist agrees on, well... transfat goes away.
 

Crazycoco

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
142
And i Would say That this observational sudy is a good one, that confirms what appears clear now. It's always the same story: bit protein (Fish/meat) little ( if none) added fats, physical activity. Not so much calories and basta.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom