To not understand why my healthy (I think) way of eating isn't making me feel energetic and fabulous

There was a children's spin off, but Gladiators itself wasn't a kids' show, it was prime-time Saturday night family entertainment.

I don’t think many teenage girls watched it did they?
I remember it being more of a kids show?
I suppose you view the 90s through the lens in which you and your peer group saw them. I did work in Topshop at 17 and we didn’t keep any clothes over a size 14 on many ranges out on the shop floor. Even then I thought that was wild.

Greek yogart daily made me feel awful, once I cut it down to 2-3x a week I was much better.

The 90s was also the start of the Gladitors TV series. Not a lot of starving waifs in that.

The 90’s were also the era of page 3 girls and boob jobs. Alongside lad culture the popular look was “confident and attractive”.

There were supermodels and Courtney Love type sub groups but angst ridden heroin chic wasn’t as pervasive as its made out to be.

Brittle bone disease did seem to be a thing then. Maybe less specialist schools so children with a range of conditions mixed in mainstream. But certainly osteoporosis was well known if only as an old lady thing There was lots of milk is good for your bones messaging in the 80’s and 90’s. You hardly see real milk these days.

Interesting- I grew up in a working class town and the struggle to afford hard candy nail polish and look like Kate Moss was real.
we drank pints and bottles of white cider but spent our lunch money on it so mostly went hungry and stayed thin.
The only knowledge I had of osteoporosis was a kid in my school who had ‘brittle bone disease’
The 90s seem like yesterday but so
much has changed ime

Health Coaches are also qualified. And both of the above recommendations are fully qualified, one an NHS health coach the other a leading sports dietitian. Google them.

I like the way the 90s is considered to be a long time ago. It was yesterday and nothing has changed about life very much at all.

Hahaa. Being thin wasn’t the only vibe in the 90’s though. As ever it was mostly a middle class issue. The lad culture meant lots of pint drinking. It was cool to be be fit and strong ( dance, running aerobics were all
popular) and everyone knew about osteoporosis

You can tell so many women on mumsnet were young women and teenagers in the 90s. The levels of competitive under eating, misplaced nutritional knowledge and eating disorders are unreal.
I worry about people’s bone density and anxiety as they age

Maybe a large glass of rosé and bag of crisps would make you feel fabulous
.usually does the trick for me

Look up ‘orthorexia’.
You’re trying to eat so healthily that it’s become unhealthy.

Is that what you’re eating by choice or because it’s what you feel a good diet should be and hoping it will make you feel healthy and energetic? Just curious

Pointing out misinformation helps everyone.

But yes, clearly, there's only one scientist around here.

It's Otzi the Iceman

I wonder how all of you bickering “scientists” think this is helping the op?

she has, I suspect, like most others, stopped reading.

I stand by my informed opinion that there is no nutritional benefit to eating grains, that it is safe and beneficial to omit them completely, that they cause many health problems and that I felt a lot better without them. I've read your sources, and I agree with them. They don't tell the whole story, because a single paper never could and because your interpretation is too narrow and too simple. Bodies are not.

No, that isn't exactly the same as 'carbs have nothing you need'. If you need a retraction, consider it retracted. There's still plenty of room for discussion, but it requires accepting new information. Not MY information - just not your own. If you feel you know everything there is to know already, good for you. Scientists still seem to be researching diet a bit, so they obviously feel there's more to it. I'll stick with them. (Maybe you should write and tell them....)

Am I right, or am I wrong though, that the best way the body can process carbs is via the Kit Kat.

Im right arent I?

I've never said I do have an English degree, fire away at my grammar. It's not my strength and I might learn something.

How much nutrition is included in a medical doctor's undergraduate training? The answer when I was kicking about in hospitals and socialising with doctors varied between about 2 and 4 hours. Not a whole lot, I think you'll agree. Has it changed?

I have a first in biological sciences. And a 2:1 in physiotherapy (which I practiced for 15 years until I retired). Both from well respected, bricks and mortar, UK universities. I did a couple of hundred or so hours of research into low carb diets about five years ago when I started one myself, because I wanted to be well informed that what I was doing was safe and beneficial, and because it was interesting. I concluded it was safe and beneficial, and went ahead. So I have firsthand experience as well. Before I did it, I thought it was all rubbish and people needed carbs. Now I don't. So I understand it's a controversial view.

I only read published, peer reviewed, scientific papers (or books which referenced them. And I checked the sources) written by doctors with post graduate interest in nutrition or respected scientists. Like I was taught is gold standard scientific method. But it was in my free time and I didn't keep referenced notes. I am not (quite) that much of a nerd.

I am not pretending I'm the only person with a degree. Or that I'm some ultimate expert that knows best. But also I'm not an idiot who doesn't know how bodies work, or relies on google AI for information, or who is repeating mis-information from dubious sources on the internet, which seems to be the popular view.

They do work, but it's important to make sure you need them first as there can be adverse effects from overdosing B vitamins.

Only if you're deficient in vitamin B.

Get vit b injections they work

I did a bunch of OU courses when I had some free time.

Doesn't mean I come on Mumsnet as though I'm the only person with a science qualification.

I come on Mumsnet to witter on about random shit I have an opinion on. In this case, my educated assessment of the situation is as follows;

When humans were solely hunter-gatherers, they ate anything they could find. Once they developed agricultural technology and the language to communicate their skills, we saw exponential growth in population, further technological and social development, extended lifespans and increased survival. So if it weren't for the grains, we wouldn't be chatting shit online about carbs and protein and calories and, most of all, cats all these thousands of years later, we'd still be a handful of humans selected through luck and horsepower, looking at those weird little furry creatures catching rodents and wondering whether it was better to skin and eat it or feed it to the canines that have started to hang around in the hope of some bits of meat.

And I AM more qualified to weigh evidence. I have a science degree. That's the whole point of a science degree! (I also know that doctors have minimal, if any nutritional training, and that health degrees contain comparatively little science, because I have one of those as well. So I DO have and idea what I'm talking about. Certainly compared to anyone without those qualifications. You can't your mother's qualifications give your claims validity and discount mine). I am not reliant on second hand qualifications. I studied for my own.

Well it's clear you don't have an English degree as this is barely literate. Are you saying that in addition to a science degree, you also have an MD? Or you also have a nutritionist qualification? What's a 'health degree'? Something made up and given out by the RFK jr school of science? And, by the way, you have no way of knowing what kind of degree I might or might not have (I have several, actually, as it happens, and don't need any of them to know that you're peddling absolute bullshit).

I don't have the time or the inclination to write a book from memory about something I studied in my free time five years ago.

Not sure exactly what you're referring to (your assertion that all carbs are heavily processed?), but was it in your free time or as part of your 'degree' studies? Either way, you seem to have plenty of time to write long, weirdly capitalised posts that are rife with misinformation.

Well, you would do that, because you have rejected the clear evidence I and others provided that the body does need glucose and that grains do provide nutrients.

I don't care what physiological processes you learnt twenty years ago. The fact remains that you were wrong to say that the body does not need glucose and wrong to say that grains don't contain anything the body needs.

I accept plenty of things without citations, but not incorrect statements, obviously.

You can think my attempt at comic exaggeration is rude if you like but to my mind it's far worse to spout nonsense disguised as dietary advice. I do get very irate at the fact that people will say any old shit on diet threads that MN fails to regulate, so to be honest, there's a lot worse I could have said.