We have been captured by a set of really bad ideas.
We are all told that we must eat less fat and eat more fibre. More fibre means more grains.
How did this happen? Did we really just get lazier? How might this happen in only 30 years!
Maybe the ideas behind this are just wrong!
Dr Staffan Lindberg has gone back to ALL the research and this is what he found - that neither low or no fat or high fibre have a case at all.
"Low-fat high-fiber dietsRestriction of dietary fat, in particular saturated fat, has been promoted since the mid 20th century in order mainly to prevent atherosclerotic disease and overweight, which became increasingly common during the first half of the century .
The benefits of dietary fiber were proclaimed around 1970 although proponents of ’coarse food’ have been heard long before. The idea largely emerged from belief systems concerning disturbed bowel function, bloating and ”autointoxication” in the 19th and early 20th century .....
The notion that fat is unhealthy has essentially been based on epidemiological studies, in particular the Seven Countries Study . In this study, 12,095 men aged 40-59 were followed for 10 years starting around 1960. The incidence of ischemic heart disease was positively associated with total and saturated fat intakes, which, respectively, explained 25% and 70% of the disease rates among the study populations.
However, despite widespread consensus among nutrition experts today, there is no solid evidence of fat enrichment or fiber depletion being important causes of Western disease.
In the Seven Countries Study, US men had more than 100-fold higher incidence of ischemic heart disease than Cretan men despite identical fat intake, 40 percent of dietary energy (E%) . In one large randomized controlled study of nearly 49,000 US women, the Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial, no beneficial effect was seen on cardiovascular disease, cancer or total mortality during 8 years’ follow-up by a low-fat, high fiber diet ....
With regard to dietary fiber, the evidence from intervention studies is even less convincing. The only published randomized controlled study of increased fiber intake, mainly from whole-grains, resulted in non-significantly (p=0.10) increased risk of death from heart disease among patients with established atherosclerotic heart disease at study start .
In several prospective epidemiological studies people who prefer whole-grain cereals to more refined ones have a lower risk of cardiovascular disease , but this may possibly represent confounding by other lifestyle factors, rather than a direct effect of dietary fiber.
Somewhat surprisingly, the long held notion that colon cancer is prevented by dietary fiber is not supported by available evidence [19-21].In summary, these and other studies suggest that low-fat diets are slightly better than the average Western diet, while there is less convincing evidence in support of a high fiber intake."
So how to make sense of anything now?
I use a simple test. Is what I am eating fit with my evolved metabolism? That is, is the food on my plate what my ancestors ate for millions of years. If not, then I don't eat or drink it anymore. And the result for me?
I have not only lost weight but also all my tummy fat, my man boobs and my bloat. I look and feel 15 years younger.
All of this in 3 months.
Don't believe me? Try it.