John McDougall Diet? (starch Solution)

Reaper242xx

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
49
I read a lot of dieting books, suffice to say I think most are crap with only sprinkles of good advice here and there. However I found Starch Solution to be particularly and uniquely bad. I just got done reading it a couple days ago and I really didn't pick up any good advice from the read at all. Not only is the diet really high in starch but also seems to promote mild to moderate amounts of fats from nuts and seeds or other plant fats. Basically a high starch moderate PUFA diet. Furthermore, if someone was to check out recent pictures of McDougall he looks like complete crap. All this to say that's not even the most alarming part in my opinion, McDougall has racked up quite a following on youtube and other platforms. I struck up a conversation with a guy on another forum site who claimed he had actually been to a McDougall seminar and he said there's only two types of people there. Those that are obese and new to the program, and those that have been following the program for years and look basically like skeletons with skin draped over them (basically look like McDougall himself). I'm just wondering how this guy has gotten as popular as he is. Also I'm very curious to know if any other Peatarians out here use to be former starch eaters, and if so what was your overall impression of the diet.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
You attack him so hard because he challenges your dogma. The guy is 71 years old. Give him a break. Let me see you make it to 71 heart disease, hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis, depression meds and cancer free while maintaining an optimal lean body index. People getting lots of results following high starch low fat. Even Peat recently said that if ones digestion is healthy then starch works. Do your research.
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Reaper242xx

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
49
You attack him so hard because he challenges your dogma. The guy is 71 years old. Give him a break. Let me see you make it to 71 heart disease, hypertension and cancer free while maintaining an optimal lean body index. People getting lots of results following high starch low fat. Even Peat recently said that if ones digestion is healthy then starch works. Do your research.
He's not really challenging my dogma, lol. The only difference is I believe in high carb via fruit/sucrose and saturated fat. He believes in high carb via starch and polyunsaturated fat. From a macronutrient standpoint we're the same, but in reality they're completely different. Plus you can't ignore the fact people generally don't look healthy after years of following his advice. The premature aging is alarming. BTW his body index is no where near optimal.
 

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,707
Yes they becoming weak eating like that for years.

Protein,retinol,taurine,zinc, all are possible deficiencies on vegan diet. Also calcium. And some of them are also deficient in sodium and chloride too.

It is really simple.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
He believes in high carb via starch and polyunsaturated fat.

No he's doesn't. He's anti-all fats; pufa, mufa, and sfa. He "lets" some of his patients eat some avos, nuts etc. but only because he knows that very few will actually do his true program.

And the low fat complex carbohydrate eaters didn't start with him. It goes way back to people like Nathan Pritikin, Dennis Burkett and others.

From a macronutrient standpoint we're the same, but in reality they're completely different.

Starch is different that fruit. Glucose is different than sucrose because of fructose. Starches are chains of glucose sugars that also provide glucose to cells, but the distinct and irreplaceable job of starch is to make muscle cells more responsive to insulin, and thus pull more glucose out of the blood, more so than would be possible if sugars alone were sources of glucose.

Plus you can't ignore the fact people generally don't look healthy after years of following his advice.

I can because that's subjective. I'm not interested in posting pictures of people for a "who looks younger" contest of random anecdotes. Unless you're having sex with someone, you don't know what they're really doing and how they're eating and living on a daily basis.

BTW his body index is no where near optimal.

Exactly what I mean about subjective. That's your opinion. There are people who believe that a low body fat percentage is healthy.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
This is why I said do your research because you don't even know what the guy believes. You claim he's anti-sucrose yet here he is saying sucrose from cane sugar/refined sucrose doesn't make you fat and even with that he'll still get hate here on the pro-sucrose RPF.

 
OP
R

Reaper242xx

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
49
No he's doesn't. He's anti-all fats; pufa, mufa, and sfa. He "lets" some of his patients eat some avos, nuts etc. but only because he knows that very few will actually do his true program.

And the low fat complex carbohydrate eaters didn't start with him. It goes way back to people like Nathan Pritikin, Dennis Burkett and others.



Starch is different that fruit. Glucose is different than sucrose because of fructose. Starches are chains of glucose sugars that also provide glucose to cells, but the distinct and irreplaceable job of starch is to make muscle cells more responsive to insulin, and thus pull more glucose out of the blood, more so than would be possible if sugars alone were sources of glucose.



I can because that's subjective. I'm not interested in posting pictures of people for a "who looks younger" contest of random anecdotes. Unless you're having sex with someone, you don't know what they're really doing and how they're eating and living on a daily basis.



Exactly what I mean about subjective. That's your opinion. There are people who believe that a low body fat percentage is healthy.
Well anti all fats is also bad, some fat is needed to absorbed critical fat soluble vitamins. Also certain types of saturated fats, like MCTs, have thyroid enhancing abilities. Yes I'm well aware of Nathan Pritikin, he's the guy that influenced George McGovern to create the current day nutritional guidelines known as the Standard American Diet. And as far as body index goes even Ray himself mentioned those that have more muscle tend to have longer lifespans. Check out Ray Peat clips at youtube. All this to say I'm sorry if my blunt critique of this guy offended you, not what I was going for. Also paymanz brought up a very good point, the calcium is missing on this diet as well.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
BTW his body index is no where near optimal.

His BMI is the same as Peats:

Untitled 2.jpeg
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
he's the guy that influenced George McGovern to create the current day nutritional guidelines known as the Standard American Diet.

There is so much wrong with this. The diet that most Americans eat is what the true standard American diet is, not the one on the gov't site. And the gov't diet is not the same as Pritikin.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
All this to say I'm sorry if my blunt critique of this guy offended you, not what I was going for.

You can perceive me as being offended but that has nothing to do with the arguments presented. That's you dodging my arguments. I'm simply responding to what you're saying with counter arguments. Readers of this thread will make their own decision on who won.
 
OP
R

Reaper242xx

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
49
There is so much wrong with this. The diet that most Americans eat is what the true Standard American Diet is, not the one on the gov't site. And the gov't diet is not the same as Pritikin.
George McGovern was following the Pritikin diet when the guidelines were set way back in the 70s. He thought a high whole grain diet that was low in fat (but ironically high in PUFA) was optimal. With the exception of the small amount of dairy and meat allowed how is the SAD diet different from Pritikin?
 
OP
R

Reaper242xx

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
49
You can perceive me as being offended but that has nothing to do with the arguments presented. That's you dodging my arguments. I'm simply responding to what you're saying with counter arguments. Readers of this thread will make their own decision on who won.
I think you missed the point of my OP. I wasn't looking for an argument nor will I entertain one. I was simply looking for other impressions on the diet. You gave me yours, which I'm glad. I was actually wanting to hear from someone who liked this approach. The whole point of the Ray Peat/physiological approach to nutrition is going by what the science says works. And not drifting off into ideologies. I believe, my opinion of course, that McDougall's approach is heavily based in ideology and not scientific evidence.
 
OP
R

Reaper242xx

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
49
This is why I said do your research because you don't even know what the guy believes. You claim he's anti-sucrose yet here he is saying sucrose from cane sugar/refined sucrose doesn't make you fat and even with that he'll still get hate here on the pro-sucrose RPF.


It's the fact extra glucose is not needed if you're eating a high fruit and high sucrose diet. Sucrose has plenty of both glucose and fructose. Glucose by itself can cause people to gain weight much easier then sucrose. If you dislike the RPF then why are you here? I believe McDougall has a forum as well. Also the guy seems to give mixed messages. I can only go by what the book he authored said. I haven't watch many of his videos. But his book makes it clear to feature potatoes, rice, and corn, not cane sugar.
 

theLaw

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
1,403
I think that beans are one of the major problems with his diet. He and Dean Ornish aren't exactly selling youth and vitality.

It should also be noted that it's difficult to take dietary advise from a guy who is an Olympic-level prick (just check out McDougall on Jimmy Moore's podcast) .

I noticed something similar with Chris Kresser on Joe Rogan's podcast where just seems generally unhappy (reads like a lack of energy).:(
 

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,707
You don't have to be a "vegan" to eat a high starch, low fat diet. Most people who eat this way aren't vegan such as @tyw

Also, Peat has said that it's possible to get enough protein. Doesn't mean he endorses the whole philosophy.

.
Mc dougall promotes veganism to my knowledge, and OP was about him i believe.

That potato/mushroom vegan diet is very especial form of vegan diet, may not be sustainable for long term, at least for some people.And it still has the other deficiencies i mentioned.

Veganism is not optimal diet, your agree on this.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
Mc dougall promotes veganism to my knowledge, and OP was about him i believe.



That potato/mushroom vegan diet is very especial form of vegan diet, may not be sustainable for long term, at least for some people.

Now you're changing your argument though. Before it was just a generic "vegan" diet that was insufficient to you and then when I showed you Peat saying that a person could get a well balance of amino acids on a vegan diet you then say "that's a special form though.."

And it still has the other deficiencies i mentioned.

Unless you test everything you eat to see it's zinc content then you don't know how much zinc you're ingesting.

Veganism is not optimal diet, your agree on this.

It depends on the context.
 
Last edited:

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,707
Now you're changing your argument though.
Yes, i should have said that potato and mushroom probably could correct only protein shortage on vegan diet. It is a good version of a vegan based diet, but its not optimal.

Ok,forget zinc, what can you say about the other nutrients i mentioned?! Yes! There is no taurine,retinol,carnosin in any plant based food.and in some instances they are high on phosphorus and p:ca ratio, like potato for example.

With veganism you just limit your food choices, it is an spiritual thing, for health you dont need to label your life style and limit yourself!

I didnt even mention b12! Haha!
 
Last edited:

paymanz

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
2,707
Mineral wise ,the good side of plant based diet is they are lower on iron, higher on manganese and potassium. Usually!
 

Sunny Jack

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
152
The McDougall diet seems less intellectually sound than Peat to me. Basically, it's based on his observations in Hawaii and a bunch of 1970s studies, which he never updates. Compare the McDougall forums to here, for example, to see the gap in intellectual debate. That said, as theLaw said above, he isn't selling youth and vitality. Most of his followers are fairly old, and anti-aging is far lower on their list of priorities than things like losing weight or managing diabetes. He himself fully accepts the inevitability of death, and doesn't really sell his diet in terms of curing aging, hair-loss, wrinkles, etc., but more in terms of heart disease and diabetes.

John McDougall himself seems like a classic Type-A Personality, in that he is certain that he is right, is highly competitive, impatient, ambitious, etc. He admits to this himself, when he says that he is extreme, and moderation does not work for him. That said, his dietary philosophy does have many emotionally attractive aspects to it, which he skilfully enhances with his rhetorical skills. Starch is cheap and durable, and a person could live quite well on cheap, easy-to-grow, and durable grains and tubers. Certainly, in an economic or military crisis (or zombie apocalypse) they would be very useful, since they are exactly the kinds of foods that are easily stockpilable - rice, quinoa, beans, lentils, pasta, oatmeal, canned vegetables, etc. I also like how he allows certain cheats such as ketchup and other condiments on fat-free potatoes and starches to make them more palatable at first, and also his responsible take on alcohol consumption, in that to permit it even in moderation would send the wrong signal to those with extreme personalities (like him).

Basically, the McDougall diet certainly works for fat loss, but if you wish to maintain youthful vitality it is probably best to incorporate some Peaty additions, such as ensuring one gets enough protein and calcium, and more saturated than polyunsaturated fats in one's diet. It may not quite be Peat, but you could definitely do a lot worse that McDougall.
 

Similar threads

P
Replies
10
Views
4K
Polo Saad
P
Back
Top Bottom