I though the Atkins diet was a lot of crap, but at least they had a theory behind it. Though this seems to be the opposite of food combining, mixing carbs and protein. I have read beofe that it will slow down something, making it the equivalent of eating higher glycemic index foods.
What's the point of getting all complicated... eat the right portions of the right food at the right times....Exercise...Stay consistent...That's really all you need. Problem with most people is paralysis through analysis.
I would never recommend this arbitrary and excessively exclusionary diet plan to anyone.
* It does not mention quantity. You will get fat if you eat too many sweet potatoes or too much beef, yet it gives off the impression that you can eat as much of these foods as you want and "get shredded".
* It is void of sources of healthy plant fats and protein, such as avocados, almonds, walnuts, pumpkin seeds, chia seeds and sunflower seeds.
* Why does fowl get subdivided (turkey vs chicken) but fish does not? There are vast varieties of fish that provide different levels of good nutrients (Vit D, Omega 3s) and bad ones (mercury). Among the best fish to eat should be further subdivided (for example, Pacific sockeye salmon has significantly more omega 3 than atlantic salmon)...and really those that have the lowest concentrations of mercury (salmon and sardines are the best bang for the buck in terms of low mercury, high omega 3 and high vitamin D).
* Plenty of other excellent foods are simply neglected for no reason at all. These foods include: bok choy, swiss chard and collard greens, which are extremely high in B vitamins and potassium. Others, such as beef liver and other organ meats, are exceptionally high in nutrients, but aren't mentioned either.
* Perhaps worst of all, some of these foods cannot be eaten blindly, whether because of allergies, intolerances or just aren't that nutritionally excellent. Protein powder is a convenience product and not natural food, can be difficult for people with lactose intolerance, and is often loaded with sugars and fillers, depending on the brand and type of protein. Again, some fish are high in mercury and should be consumed few and far between. Corn is the most over-produced and over-consumed carbohydrate on the planet, and if we didn't notice from yesterday's HN post, "100% whole grain cereal" is among the most nutritionally void foods ever created.
My best guess is that this list was hastily made without any of these important considerations, and should be flagged.
A little too simple to be a comprehensive diet plan, methinks...more like a rule of thumb.
I'm not sure why lentils, for instance, are in the complex carb category when their protein content is comparable to some of the stuff in the lean protein column. It would be handy to know when you're either out of meat or on a budget (lentils are cheap--I keep at least two pounds in the pantry at all times).
I also take issue with the way this table seems to suggest that protein powder is somehow interchangeable with a chicken breast for your nutrition. It's not.
6 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 23.0 ms ] threadI though the Atkins diet was a lot of crap, but at least they had a theory behind it. Though this seems to be the opposite of food combining, mixing carbs and protein. I have read beofe that it will slow down something, making it the equivalent of eating higher glycemic index foods.
* It does not mention quantity. You will get fat if you eat too many sweet potatoes or too much beef, yet it gives off the impression that you can eat as much of these foods as you want and "get shredded".
* It is void of sources of healthy plant fats and protein, such as avocados, almonds, walnuts, pumpkin seeds, chia seeds and sunflower seeds.
* Why does fowl get subdivided (turkey vs chicken) but fish does not? There are vast varieties of fish that provide different levels of good nutrients (Vit D, Omega 3s) and bad ones (mercury). Among the best fish to eat should be further subdivided (for example, Pacific sockeye salmon has significantly more omega 3 than atlantic salmon)...and really those that have the lowest concentrations of mercury (salmon and sardines are the best bang for the buck in terms of low mercury, high omega 3 and high vitamin D).
* Plenty of other excellent foods are simply neglected for no reason at all. These foods include: bok choy, swiss chard and collard greens, which are extremely high in B vitamins and potassium. Others, such as beef liver and other organ meats, are exceptionally high in nutrients, but aren't mentioned either.
* Perhaps worst of all, some of these foods cannot be eaten blindly, whether because of allergies, intolerances or just aren't that nutritionally excellent. Protein powder is a convenience product and not natural food, can be difficult for people with lactose intolerance, and is often loaded with sugars and fillers, depending on the brand and type of protein. Again, some fish are high in mercury and should be consumed few and far between. Corn is the most over-produced and over-consumed carbohydrate on the planet, and if we didn't notice from yesterday's HN post, "100% whole grain cereal" is among the most nutritionally void foods ever created.
My best guess is that this list was hastily made without any of these important considerations, and should be flagged.
I'm not sure why lentils, for instance, are in the complex carb category when their protein content is comparable to some of the stuff in the lean protein column. It would be handy to know when you're either out of meat or on a budget (lentils are cheap--I keep at least two pounds in the pantry at all times).
I also take issue with the way this table seems to suggest that protein powder is somehow interchangeable with a chicken breast for your nutrition. It's not.