When I started this journey back in March, I figured it would mostly be about moving more. And that's half of why I signed up -- I felt too sedentary lately & worried that would negatively contribute to my health. So a competition offered in part by a local gym & one of their trainers was bound to do just that, right? (The other reason I joined the competition was because I wanted another photoshoot with the awesome Vixen gals - can you blame me??)
Then the 2nd week of our Weekly Check-in Meetings, our trainer wanted to discuss the diet side of fitness a little. Afterall, the point of the program/competition wasn't to lose weight, it was to improve your overall fitness; to make a positive change in your life. (They took measurements, sure, but just as important was how much you interacted with everyone in the group & what contribution you brought to the group.) As our trainer put it, you cannot be at your best physical condition if you are putting junk into your body. And no amount of exercise at 1-2 hours per day can counteract what you do (& don't) put in your mouth the other 23+ hours of the day (or 14-16 hours, sleep notwithstanding).
He started talking about whole foods vs. processed foods, and more specifically processed carbs (as that's what permeates the Standard American Diet nowadays); how those items (flour, sugar, bread, pasta, cereals, rice, etc) are not adding much nutritionally to your diet compared to what they do to your insulin (& therefore your body's ability to regulate its fat storage or release) & how fat/saturated fat does not contribute to gaining fat nor to heart disease. I listened, but I was skeptical. This advice goes against everything you hear from Conventional Wisdom -- most medical doctors, government agencies, media, etc. But quite frankly, there's a LOT of Conventional Wisdom that I already disagree with (the use of lotion/moisturizers, the use of makeup foundation, treatment of my migraines, etc), so why am I taking their word on this?
But I wasn't ready to take this trainer's word on its face-value alone either. Luckily, he didn't want us to either. He encouraged us to do some research, including recommending a documentary (that you can stream on Netflix, should you want to) that outlines how the Low-Fat Dogma came to fruition not too long ago. I found this interesting, as I had never researched its origin, I had always just taken it at face value as fact -- something very unlike me. I don't take anyone's word at face-value...I have to know know KNOW why why WHY...yes, I was one of THOSE annoying kids. ;) So, I started my research. Here are some surprising things that I learned:
1) The Low-Fat Dogma was instituted by a Senatorial Committee. Not a committee of doctors or scientists or nutritionists. Of Senators. (Huh. Interesting -- do you trust Congress to know what's best for YOUR health?)
2) Fat in foods does not make you fat. Saturated fat in foods does not raise your cholesterol. Cholesterol in foods does not raise your cholesterol. There have been NO significant studies to support these theories. None. And the Senatorial Committee knew this when they set out these guidelines, simply telling the scientists who objected to this mandate that they "did not have the luxury of waiting for definitive results". (WOW. Really? And they're willing to put out National Health Guidelines based on results they know aren't definitive?? Huh.)
3) The rise in processed foods directly correlates to these National Health Guidelines, along with the rise in an emphasis on individual nutrients rather than whole foods. (For more on this, I *highly* recommend reading Michael Pollan's "In Defense of Food".)
4) Cholesterol does not cause heart disease. Cholesterol tries to REPAIR heart disease. There'a reason why every cell in your body makes it -- it is the repair system. If your arteries become damaged (thru inflammation or oxidation), cholesterol is what comes in to try to repair those sites. So blaming cholesterol on heart disease/heart attacks is like blaming the paramedic who shows up to the scene of an accident for causing the accident. (But we can measure/quantify cholesterol. We can't measure/quantify inflammation/oxidation.)
5) Robert Atkins did not die from a heart attack/heart disease. He had a cardiac infection. Completely different -- hopefully you understand the difference.
6) Calories-In/Calories-Out is a MYTH (more on this in a later, more detailed blog post, but until then Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat" is an EXCELLENT read/explanation of why this is simply not true.)
7) Not all calories are created equal. Sounds simple, as we know you cannot be healthy on a diet of Mountain Dew only, despite the fact that it's "fat free". But I'm amazed at how many people (myself included at first) think that your body somehow processes one refined carb (Mountain Dew) differently than another refined carb (flour). They all contribute to the Insulin Rollercoaster (which derails your body's natural ability to regulate its fat stores), and provide little other nutrition for your body. (Again I recommend Gary Taubes & his "Good Calories, Bad Calories" for more on this...until my more detailed post later.)
So, I decided to give cutting back on the processed carbs a try for a week or so. I was basically eating fruit, veggies, meat & dairy -- trying to get my overall daily carb consumption down to a more manageable 100-150g of carbs a day to help re-regulate my insulin system. And BOY was the change dramatic (& completely unexpected). But more on that in the next post...
What I find interesting, though, is that when I tell people how I'm eating (when they ask, of course), I usually get some form of "Oh, so it's Atkins/South Beach/etc" in response. No, it's not. Atkins is about eliminiating all carbs, being conscious of when you're in ketosis, and then slowly adding carbs back in (anywhere from no fruits/veggies, to all fruits/veggies) based on what your system can "handle". South Beach is not only about eliminating the carbs, but also eliminating/significantly reducing fat from your diet. Umm, no thanks - talk about miserable. And if this is supposed to be a long-term lifestyle change and not a fad DIET, then you can't be miserable.
But people feel the need to put you in a box/category, to make themselves feel more comfortable I assume? My "I eat whole foods" (fruit, veggies, meat & dairy) confuses them, so they feel they must label it? Or if they can't label it, then they can't argue against it? Is it easier to dismiss someone's choices if you align them with a philosophy that you've already made your mind up about (usually with little to no actual research)?
Who knows... And who cares? Frankly, it's not about them. It's about me. It works for me, and that's all that matters. I'm not telling anyone you HAVE to do what I do. But if you ask me what I'm doing, because you want the same or similar results, try not to be immediately dismissive by making unfounded, unresearched assumptions, ok? Otherwise, just don't ask.
No comments:
Post a Comment