To question the Eat Well plate?

[TheGruffaloMother]

I know it can take an age to filter new evidence down into official advice but am really struggling to fathom why the Eat Well plate hasn't yet changed despite everything I keep seeing in the media suggesting we've known for a while now that eating such a high proportion of carbohydrate isn't necessarily healthy. Is high fat the way to go? High protein? Is the official advice wrong? Do the alternatives offer lasting ways to keep your weight under control?

We can't really count solely on what we are evolved to do or what is more natural though seeing as none of our lifestyle is natural.

And there is a vital social aspect of food. If we're going down the 'natural' route, we are evolved to be social animals and part of that is linked to food- this is why birthday cake for eg is still healthy and valuable.

Again the issue is quantity more than quality. If you eat one small piece of birthday cake for eg instead of your regular snack of nuts your health will not be affected, because it's not every meal, it's not every day.

If I eat badly, getting calories from low nutrient dense food (beige ar brightly coloured supermarket long shelf life food, that wild animals probably wouldn't touch) I feel hungry.
If I eat high nutrient density food e.g. eggs avocados nuts steak chicken fruit and veg, I feel satisfied. I feel physically as though I have had enough to eat: my body has enough vitamins and minerals and I don't have cravings.
If I eat badly for a few days I will take a multivitamin so I don't get what I think of as a nutrient craving.

Eating well is, for most people, time consuming and expensive. Most people are short of time and money. There are ways to eat healthily on a budget but for some people it requires changing the habits of a lifetime and kids these days are conditioned to think nothing of eating crisps, cheap chocolate etc (foods which are not just health neutral but bad for you) on a daily basis.

I do have to bite my tongue when I see massively overweight individuals fretting about the 'dangers' of low fat spread or a muller lite yoghurt whilst totally ignoring the very obvious, and far more serious problem of their obesity.

said with true empathy, compassion and of course a deep understanding that not everyone views and experiences things in the way you do. It'd be interesting to see how your self discipline held up if you were in an almost constant state of craving.

I don't think I've seen anyone make a point of trying to debunk the validity of balancing calories in with calories used. But where those calories come from does influence things like satiety, blood sugars, speed of digestion, etc. So for people actually experiencing obesity issues, being given advice specifically tailored to increase satiety, therefore reducing the risk of overeating due to craving, seems far more sensible to me than dishing out a one size fits all approach that countless obese people have found not to work for them.

*Slim doesn't mean healthy.
You can be a slim but if you are eating nothing but low fat "healthy" whole grains and other heavily processed carbs, that's not healthy. 2000 calories of junk a day isn't the same as 2000 calories of natural leafy greens, veg and unprocessed meats, eggs and seafood.

In the long term, the more natural diet is going to mean less illness, fewer medical conditions. It not about the calories.*

This is a very common misconception from the obese. 2000 calories a day is 2000 calories a day, whether it comes from healthy eating, sugar, fat, whatever.

Being obese is the biggest threat to health there is. I would be inclined to agree that between 2 individuals with a BMI of 23ish, earing a healthy diet would be better that one based solely on junk.

I would disagree with the suggestion that an obese individual eating healthy foods would overall enjoy better health than a slim one who eats junk.

Perhaps this too is part of the problem, people playing down just how much of a threat obesity is to health?

Rixera - none of your lifestyle is natural?!

...influence things like satiety, blood sugars, speed of digestion, etc

Can't you just exercise some will power, a bit of self-discipline? Everybody feels hungry, it's not just obese people. I think rebranding hunger as 'craving' and 'greed' as binge eating disorder is really unhelpful.

We can't eat what we want, when we want. That's just life. If you do, you will be obese - it's really quite simple.

Who eats just 2000 calories a day? What does that look like in terms of food?

I think a big factor that differentiates slim people and obese people is that slim people understand that being hungry and a bit preoccupied with food is a perfectly natural state to be in, one of several that we experience over the course of the day.

I agree that hunger is a natural state and that many people have lost sight of that, but I don't think that this knowledge is something that even most slim people have! Some slim people seem to eat whatever they like. Others are obsessive dieters. Some have eating disorders. Some are just not that into food. Some do tons of exercise. And yes, some do have genuinely good willpower and healthy eating habits, but by no means all of them.

To say that slim people understand and fat people don't understand is a ridiculous and self-congratulatory over-simplification.

YY estateagent. Nowadays, living with HIV and responding to treatment will not significantly affect your lifespan, whereas Type 2 diabetes (of which obesity is a cause) can knock 10 years off your life expectancy. Obesity is one of the biggest health crises out there.

And the "science" behind different carbs making people feel hungrier/less hungrier is nowhere near as established as people like to think.

To borrow a phrase from the relationships board, we don't have an obesity problem, we have a self control problem. And it's not easy to have self control when everywhere we go we are bombarded with food, mostly junk.

Unfortunately our biochemistry hasn't changed beyond what we were evolved to do, namely eat entirely unprocessed food and burn a lot of energy, beyond the odd tweak like a gene that allows many Europeans to consume unfermented dairy beyond early childhood.
I agree that most people's lifestyles and food consumption have moved very far away from that, and precisely therein lies the problem.
Our food has changed dramatically in decades, and evolution takes millions of years.

estate, do you really think the notion that getting 2000 calories a day from junk food is more unhealthy than being overweight is something that just fat people say? So you're essentially saying that all slim people are healthier than me, regardless of what they eat?

I don't think the NHS has got the resources to give individuals tailored diet advice so they try to give balanced advice.

The NHS advises people to cook their food and tips on how to do so cheaply and easily. They advise smaller portions and how to exercise for free.

If you personally find eating eggs for breakfast instead of porridge suits you then you can do so.

Who eats just 2000 calories a day? What does that look like in terms of food?

My TDEE is about 1700 cals a day and I am tall and of average frame (not much in the way of body fat though)

If people (women) are regularly eating more than 2000 calories a day, that is the problem. The fact that anybody sees 2000 cals a day as being woefully too few is really worrying. That is a huge number for most women, there will be very few for whom their TDEE at a healthy BMI would exceed that number.

Can't you just exercise some will power, a bit of self-discipline?

You're not taking in any responses that don't agree with your own world-view, are you?

Gruffalo - Broadly, yes. Obesity puts significant strain on a large number of bodily functions that just won't be present in a person of healthy weight. This does not mean that a normal weight person is intrinsically healthy but a normal weight person won't have to deal with the changes large amounts of fat cells place on blood chemistry, hormone levels, or the stress of extra weight on joints etc.

So you're essentially saying that all slim people are healthier than me, regardless of what they eat?

Yes. There are very few conditions that present a bigger threat to health than obesity, and a poor diet is a drop in the ocean in comparison.

Might be a handful of exceptions to this for slim people with pre-existing conditions, but for the overwhelming majority of people that is the case.

I am satisfied (occasionally a bit full) immediately after a meal and maybe for a couple of hours thereafter, for the following 2 hours I am a bit peckish and for the hour or so before my next meal, I am hungry.This is the way it should be

^^
This.
I have always eaten this way. I love food and appreciate it more when properly hungry. Even if I am faint with hunger and dinner is an hour away I won't snack. Other than that I eat everything and love food. I never ever eat low fat or diet products or restrict carbs. My BMI is 21 as it was when I was 21 and I'm 58 now.

I'm not talking broadly though Punny. My question was very specific. Not having to deal with the same health issues as a person without a weight problem who eats rubbish doesn't mean one is healthier than the other. And it certainly isn't just overweight people who believe that.

I would highly recommend reading Dr Jason Fung's book the Obesity Code. Those of you with biochem backgrounds may spot things I missed / have a fuller critical analysis of it, but I found it incredibly eye opening and it resonated strongly with my experiences of being overweight.

I am following his recommended principles at the moment. I feel better, more energised and have lost weight already, but of course the real test will be if I can continue it long term and if I can keep the weight off permanently. But, for me, what he writes just makes sense.

When I spoke to my GP about weight loss (think it was about six months ago), she warned not to have more than three eggs a week.
So yes, it clearly does take a while for info to filter down in the NHS!

Eating LCHF has "cured" my IBS, so I am a fan :)

You're not taking in any responses that don't agree with your own world-view, are you?

My world view results in being slim and healthy though. Life is very much easier when you are a normal weight, in pretty much every way.

With the world view you have (bogged down in fat v carbs debate) it won't happen for you.

Sorry, just to add that one of the key things Dr Fung recommends, as various people have also discussed on this thread, is to avoid all snacking, the point being that when we eat is the very important 'other side of the coin' to what we eat. Fasting plays a part in his recommendations too.

Estate, you are talking actual bollocks now. Have a

It really is not about the calories. It's about the nutritional value of the foods making up those 2000 calories, and the effect those food have on metabolism. Absolutely, that will affect your long term health.

I seem to have created a cubby hole for the righteously slim to come and tell overweight people that all slim people are healthier than they are and that they obviously don't have as much self control and drive as the rest of the population.

Precisely the kind of attitude that I don't normally engage with because it completely lacks empathy and any real kind of understanding. So forgive me if I don't respond to any more of the 'motivational' fat shaming.

Clearly slim people with T2 are imaginary!!