Comments on: Old nutrition, new nutrition http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974 Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:15:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Hannah http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1804 Hannah Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:11:29 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1804 While I acknowledge that the star rating system has some flaws, there is good reason for not incorporating micronutrients. As soon as micronutrients start getting stars, we get boiled lollies, chocolate bars and soft drinks fortified with vitamins or minerals and improving their health rating. This would not be a step forward. It is also worth noting that Jenny Brand-Millers speech at the food labelling conference did not go uncontested, and not only by those who fear change and cling to the ‘old nutrition’ either. There is genuine scientific debate about the credibility of many of her claims. While I acknowledge that the star rating system has some flaws, there is good reason for not incorporating micronutrients. As soon as micronutrients start getting stars, we get boiled lollies, chocolate bars and soft drinks fortified with vitamins or minerals and improving their health rating. This would not be a step forward. It is also worth noting that Jenny Brand-Millers speech at the food labelling conference did not go uncontested, and not only by those who fear change and cling to the ‘old nutrition’ either. There is genuine scientific debate about the credibility of many of her claims.

]]> By: Bill Shrapnel http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1748 Bill Shrapnel Wed, 30 Oct 2013 00:10:18 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1748 Hi Emma I'm not involved with the development of the star labelling system I so don't have any recent solid information on it. However, anecdotal reports are that 'it wasn't working' and more development was required. Like you, I would like to see some work getting it right conceptually. If the provision of essential nutrients is the fundamental nutritional role of food, how can you ignore nutrient density? Sure, put some weighting on fibre, but let's not forget than fibre may prevent disease in 30 or 40 years time. Thiamin prevents disease in the next few months. We take essential nutrients for granted. Nutritionists should take a look at the state of those poor people escaping from that enclave in Damascus after nine months of nutritional deprivation, reduced to eating grass to survive. They had plenty of fibre! Regards, Bill Hi Emma
I’m not involved with the development of the star labelling system I so don’t have any recent solid information on it. However, anecdotal reports are that ‘it wasn’t working’ and more development was required.
Like you, I would like to see some work getting it right conceptually. If the provision of essential nutrients is the fundamental nutritional role of food, how can you ignore nutrient density? Sure, put some weighting on fibre, but let’s not forget than fibre may prevent disease in 30 or 40 years time. Thiamin prevents disease in the next few months. We take essential nutrients for granted. Nutritionists should take a look at the state of those poor people escaping from that enclave in Damascus after nine months of nutritional deprivation, reduced to eating grass to survive. They had plenty of fibre!
Regards, Bill

]]> By: Emma http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1746 Emma Tue, 29 Oct 2013 23:24:16 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1746 Hi Bill, I have worked with the algorithm underpinning the star system and I must say, I am utterly unconvinced by it. Processed muesli bars were coming out with 4 stars due to the massive weighting on fibre Fresh salmon got the same amount of stars as meat burger patties! Just a couple of the anomalies I came across. I totally agree with you in that nutrient density should underpin any national FOP labelling system. I think this system has the potential to confuse people even more. Hi Bill,

I have worked with the algorithm underpinning the star system and I must say, I am utterly unconvinced by it.

Processed muesli bars were coming out with 4 stars due to the massive weighting on fibre

Fresh salmon got the same amount of stars as meat burger patties!

Just a couple of the anomalies I came across. I totally agree with you in that nutrient density should underpin any national FOP labelling system. I think this system has the potential to confuse people even more.

]]> By: Bill Shrapnel http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1556 Bill Shrapnel Sat, 17 Aug 2013 22:30:27 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1556 Hi Karen I think many nutrition professionals are weighed down by what makes sense to them. The whole focus on lowering fat intake to address obesity makes sense; it just doesn't work. Perhaps one day a greater focus on protein will make sense. Unfortunately, it takes about 10 years for new scientific findings to find their way into clinical practice, partly because of professionals clinging onto their beliefs and partly because they don't keep up with scientific developments. Through your publication, you can help. Regards, Bill Hi Karen
I think many nutrition professionals are weighed down by what makes sense to them. The whole focus on lowering fat intake to address obesity makes sense; it just doesn’t work. Perhaps one day a greater focus on protein will make sense.
Unfortunately, it takes about 10 years for new scientific findings to find their way into clinical practice, partly because of professionals clinging onto their beliefs and partly because they don’t keep up with scientific developments. Through your publication, you can help. Regards, Bill

]]> By: Karen Sweaney http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1455 Karen Sweaney Wed, 07 Aug 2013 02:24:29 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1455 Hi Bill As Editor of Australasian Leisure Management, I have been writing on fitness, nutrition, obesity, wellness etc for the past ten years. Fitness magazines are filled with articles on the benefits of increasing the amount of protein, vegetables and fats ie olive oil. Carbohydrates ie oats and some fruits ie all the berries are also highly recommended. This dietary advice has proven successful for a large number of people having diverse lifestyles and backgrounds. I agree with you "Protein tends to get forgotten but the evidence is mounting that a bit more protein in the diet and less fat+carbohydrate may be a good thing, especially for weight management." What I also find disturbing is the amount of money spent on obesity research which often results in regurgitated information that ultimately isn't proving to be effective in reducing the actual levels of obesity! Hi Bill
As Editor of Australasian Leisure Management, I have been writing on fitness, nutrition, obesity, wellness etc for the past ten years. Fitness magazines are filled with articles on the benefits of increasing the amount of protein, vegetables and fats ie olive oil. Carbohydrates ie oats and some fruits ie all the berries are also highly recommended. This dietary advice has proven successful for a large number of people having diverse lifestyles and backgrounds.
I agree with you “Protein tends to get forgotten but the evidence is mounting that a bit more protein in the diet and less fat+carbohydrate may be a good thing, especially for weight management.”
What I also find disturbing is the amount of money spent on obesity research which often results in regurgitated information that ultimately isn’t proving to be effective in reducing the actual levels of obesity!

]]> By: Bill Shrapnel http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1416 Bill Shrapnel Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:48:27 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1416 Hello Chris What constitutes high/low fat or carbohydrate may depend on when you first studied nutrition. For me, it was the late 1970s and I was taught that a balanced diet had 40% of calories from fat and 40% from carbohydrate. Then the low fat era began, ending up with recommended fat intakes of 20-35% E and correspondingly high carbohydrate intakes. Now the pendulum is starting to swing back. For example, in the Diogenes study (diet and weight re-gain) the fat content was held constant at 36% of calories. Thinking in terms of high fat/low fat or high carb/low carb is "old nutrition". The quality of fat-rich foods and the quality carbohydrate-rich foods is key. If quality is good, the relative amounts of fat and carbohydrate don't really matter. There is nothing wrong with eating 40% of calories as fat, if the fat quality is good. It's the Mediterranean Diet approach - proven beneficial. Similarly, high carbohydrate intake is OK if the carbohydrate quality is good. However, most people who eat lots of carbohydrate actually eat quite poor diets, with high glycaemic load and plenty of empty calories. Protein tends to get forgotten but the evidence is mounting that a bit more protein in the diet and less fat+carbohydrate may be a good thing, especially for weight management. Regards, Bill Hello Chris
What constitutes high/low fat or carbohydrate may depend on when you first studied nutrition. For me, it was the late 1970s and I was taught that a balanced diet had 40% of calories from fat and 40% from carbohydrate. Then the low fat era began, ending up with recommended fat intakes of 20-35% E and correspondingly high carbohydrate intakes. Now the pendulum is starting to swing back. For example, in the Diogenes study (diet and weight re-gain) the fat content was held constant at 36% of calories.
Thinking in terms of high fat/low fat or high carb/low carb is “old nutrition”. The quality of fat-rich foods and the quality carbohydrate-rich foods is key. If quality is good, the relative amounts of fat and carbohydrate don’t really matter. There is nothing wrong with eating 40% of calories as fat, if the fat quality is good. It’s the Mediterranean Diet approach – proven beneficial.
Similarly, high carbohydrate intake is OK if the carbohydrate quality is good. However, most people who eat lots of carbohydrate actually eat quite poor diets, with high glycaemic load and plenty of empty calories.
Protein tends to get forgotten but the evidence is mounting that a bit more protein in the diet and less fat+carbohydrate may be a good thing, especially for weight management.
Regards, Bill

]]> By: Chris http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1414 Chris Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:22:47 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1414 Great article, having just completed my studies in dietetics would be interested in knowing what constitutes a lower carb, lower fat and higher protein diet? Would it be just in saying that consuming 45% of energy from carbohydrates is considered low? Same for fat with 20% and high protein being 25% of total energy intake using the AMDR's? So for a person consuming 8700 kJ per day this would equate to: 245g of carbs, 47g of fat (remembering that this should be predominately mono- and polyunsaturated) and 128g of protein per day. I look forward to your response Great article, having just completed my studies in dietetics would be interested in knowing what constitutes a lower carb, lower fat and higher protein diet? Would it be just in saying that consuming 45% of energy from carbohydrates is considered low? Same for fat with 20% and high protein being 25% of total energy intake using the AMDR’s?

So for a person consuming 8700 kJ per day this would equate to: 245g of carbs, 47g of fat (remembering that this should be predominately mono- and polyunsaturated) and 128g of protein per day.

I look forward to your response

]]> By: Sarah McKay http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1387 Sarah McKay Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:24:51 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1387 Fantastic, concise, clear summary. I've bookmarked this for future reference! Fantastic, concise, clear summary. I’ve bookmarked this for future reference!

]]> By: Ian Graham http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1380 Ian Graham Mon, 22 Jul 2013 03:08:26 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1380 Four years ago, I was diagnosed with T2 diabetes. The first thing I did was go on a low fat, low calorie diet to lose weight. I lost 30 kgs and stabilized my weight, but the blood sugars started rising again. So I did some research. I'm a physicist by training, so I can kid myself that I know how to find things out, evaluate and analyse them, and form some logical conclusions. Essentially, I came to the same conclusion as Professor Jennie Brand-Miller. So I can now continue on my lowish carbs, mixed protein, saturated/unsaturated mix of fats, low GI, high veg diet which has given me weight control, and lowered my blood sugar, blood pressure, chloresterol,..., but do so without the associated guilt and criticism by nutritionists and dietitians? Four years ago, I was diagnosed with T2 diabetes. The first thing I did was go on a low fat, low calorie diet to lose weight. I lost 30 kgs and stabilized my weight, but the blood sugars started rising again. So I did some research. I’m a physicist by training, so I can kid myself that I know how to find things out, evaluate and analyse them, and form some logical conclusions. Essentially, I came to the same conclusion as Professor Jennie Brand-Miller.

So I can now continue on my lowish carbs, mixed protein, saturated/unsaturated mix of fats, low GI, high veg diet which has given me weight control, and lowered my blood sugar, blood pressure, chloresterol,…, but do so without the associated guilt and criticism by nutritionists and dietitians?

]]> By: Milena Katz http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1379 Milena Katz Sun, 21 Jul 2013 22:29:27 +0000 http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=974#comment-1379 thanks for the blog post Bill - we still have so much more to learn. I keep saying that nutrition is such a young science! thanks for the blog post Bill – we still have so much more to learn. I keep saying that nutrition is such a young science!

]]>