/ck/ - Food & Cooking

THEY'RE ALL PRETTY GOOD FOR YOU AS LONG AS YOU EAT THEM IN MODERATION AND ALONG WITH FRUITS, VEGETABLES, ETC. AS PART OF A WELL-BALANCED DIET NIGGER

carbs arent bad for you, excess carbs are bad for you. having some self control will be least bad for you.

Everything is killing you. Have a measure and you'll be fine.

>>5819290
Bread with nutella is pretty good

The problem with carbs is they are calorie dense but do not fill you up.
800 calories worth of spaghetti and you are hungry again in a few hours.
800 calories worth of steak and your belly is groaning and you may well feel like skipping your next meal.

>>5819334
>carbs are bad

It's genetics, you science-hating tumblr whore

>>5819334
The problem here is clearly that you're just eating a plate of spaghetti with nothing else on it.

>>5819345
Carbs may not be bad but it's not your genetics either you fatlogic you.

>>5819290
Cutting out carbs is dumb, they're healthy for you, they give your body the energy you need. They only become bad when you don't use that energy.

Either way, potatoes would probably be your best option because they contain more other nutrients and vitamins (mainly in the skin) than pasta or rice.

I have been looking at glycemic index charts and that shit seems fucking random.
Uncle bens rice is the healthiest rice ?way better than brown rice?
Wonder bread is way better than baguette?
Fucking mental.


http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsweek/Glycemic_index_and_glycemic_load_for_100_foods.htm

>>5819290
barbs arent bad per se but the average eprson doesnt move enough t counteract a plate of carbs like spaghetti or a side of mashed potatos ora big bowl of fried rice. hence the bad rap for carbs. plenty of low muscle/fat mass runners eat carbs as the base of their diet.

>>5819358
glycemic index only really matters if you have diabetes

>>5819361
>low muscle/fat mass runners

Wut

>>5819369
Keeping blood sugar levels from spiking is important for everyone anon.
Insulin should not be over taxed in humans like it is today.
5000 years ago your blood sugar only spiked if you found some honey.

>>5819375
most of the food people ate 5000 years ago was covered in dirt and/or shit
>muh older diet
>muh purity

>>5819386
Is m not big on the caveman diet but you must admit that refined sugars are bad for you.
In 100 million years only a fee species can handle pure sugar.
Humans have had wide access to it for only 200 years or so.

Glycemic index is important but you can keep your glicemia under control adding fibre and proteins (sometimes fat) to those carbs.

>>5819372
not a big guy
not fat either

>>5819397
That is some next level science right there.
I wish there was more info on that.

They are not bad for you
Unless you have some rare disease or some shit
Just don't eat ton of them, remember to eat veggies as well and eat as little as possible processed carbs

>>5819430
And meat anon.

>>5819358
>Banana cake, made with sugar
>47
>Banana cake, made without sugar
>55
I'm beyond confused.

Protip, fruit and vegetables are carbs.

>>5819430
You can have carbs be a large part of your diet, a lot of healthy, long living cultures/societies have a diet that is at least 60% carbs if not more.

>>5819448
Yes potato is vegetable.
We know.

>>5819290

Refined foods are bad for you, don't lump junk food in with the word "carbohydrate"

Carbs should be the main thing you eat, but they should be coming from intact whole food sources like beans, fruits, oats, whole grains, etc

>>5819883
>Carbs should be the main thing you eat,


Its like you don't even watch the news.

Well made rice is better than well made pasta or potato. Prove me wrong.

>>5819897

Fuck the news

>>5819900
Depends on the condiments. Pasta + pesto is god tier and so is potato + butter. What the fuck goes with rice? Soy? Ketchup?

>>5819907
eggs

>>5819907
Damn it what got deleted?
I hate that stuff.

>>5819928
>2014
>not using appchan x

>>5819928

I thought the post was pretty stupid. I don't like shitposting and I think /ck/ is one of the better boards so I deleted it, kinda unnecessary.

Said that well made rice is better than equivalent pasta or potatoes. Bland rice is just so good.

>>5819955
How is that a shitpost?

>>5819960

It's not so deleting the post was unnecessary. I wrote it down in another way which made it sound stupid, at least in my eyes.

>>5819542
True that, just meant to not go overboard.

>>5819357
Carbs, protein and fat all give you energy and they are all bad if you dont do anything with them once you pass your BMR unless you're lifting weights or have a physical job.

Protip: You can live without carbs but not the other two.

>>5819334
>calorie dense
no

>>5819955
>/ck/ is one of the better boards

>>5819981

>Protip: You can live without carbs but not the other two.

A bit misleading since a diet of protein and fat will leave you in shit health and hardened arteries, while any carbohydrate source outside of refined sugar will also come with fat and protein

>>5820040
it was before you made your useless post

A lot of paleo dieters still eat rice, so I would imagine rice is the lesser evil.

>>5820115
>talking about potatoes, pasta and rice
>using the word evil

>taking advice from paleo dieters

>>5820115

You forget to factor in that paleo dieters are retarded.

SWEET POH-TAY-TOES

any other answer is incorrect. this is fact. this is my will. this is objective. you're all clinically retarded.

>>5819334
>carbs don't fill you up

your so fucking dumb.

Food is not bad for you if it's not explicitly poison. Just don't eat shit quality food and eat lots of all types of food. And fiber.

And drink water you fat fucks!

>>5820115

I don't know a massive amount about the paleo diet, but I do know for fucking certain that cavemen didn't eat rice.

It seems like a retarded diet anyway, and I'm convinced everyone I've known who says they're on a paleo diet was a shithead snowflake who was cramming McDo down their neck as soon as they think no-one's watching.

>>5820144

Ancient humans did eat a lot of tubers (potatoes) though. Paleo's mostly dumb because it claims to be based on evolutionary history, but it's so historically inaccurate that any link it would have to an early human diet is pretty much non-existant. It's also dumb to exlcude foods based on a theory rather than the overwhelming evidence that supports those foods as being healthy (whole grains and legumes)

>>5820159

Everywhere you go in Africa, people still eat a shitload of manioc/cassave (not sure if they're the same thing) and most of them aren't fat. Although some of them are really fucking fat, so that's not really that conclusive.

>>5820166

Cassava and other lean, starchy foods are practically impossible to become fat on. Some African tribes gorge themselves on milk specifically to get fat though, because in places like Ethiopia, fat = sexy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2480870/Ethiopian-Bodi-tribe-big-beautiful-men-compete-fattest.html

>>5819981
Sure, you *can* but it's not a very healthy to live in ketosis long term.

>>5820199

You try sitting on a plane from Dar-es-salaam to arusha with some 150kg motherfucker in the seat next to you shoving fufu down his neck and tell me it doesn't get you fat.

It's a question of application I guess, you just have to eat a lot of it.

>>5820208

>You try sitting on a plane from Dar-es-salaam to arusha with some 150kg motherfucker in the seat next to you shoving fufu down his neck and tell me it doesn't get you fat.

You can be fat and simultaneously be someone who eats fufu, just like you can be fat while also being a person who drinks water, but you can't blame the cassava for them being fat, that's metabolically implausible. You need to eat more fat than a cassava contains to store a significant amount of body fat.

>>5820219

Food doesn't have to contain fat to make you fat dude. I think you're misunderstanding something.

Cassava is better than potatoes, but you still shouldn't be eating loads of it if you want to lose weight.

>>5820257

>Food doesn't have to contain fat to make you fat dude.

Biologically, it does. That's how the human body works. That's why people who traditionally lived on lean, rice-based diets like the Chinese are known for being uniformly skinny.

http://books.google.com/books?id=hrdRROeCI9IC&pg=PA263

Eating a cassava-centered diets is just not conducive to weight gain. If you Americanize it though and deep fry the cassava and eat it with some fatty meat and cheese, you can become fat, but then that's not really the cassava's fault, is it?

>>5820290
>If you Americanize it though
You are clearly unfamiliar with Puerto Rican cooking. Now there's a cassava-centered diet that'll make you fat. The only reason it often doesn't is poverty.

>>5820290
>Biologically, it does. That's how the human body works.
/facepalm
You must eat a lot of nuts.

>>5820290

So you think that if I eat a kilo of potatoes every day, I won't get fat because there's no fat in it?

I think you're mistaken, but I'm not going to argue about it, or eat a shitload of cassava.

pic related - my favourite cassava dish (but it is fried, so it will definitely make you fat).

>>5820297

What do you mean?

>>5820300

>So you think that if I eat a kilo of potatoes every day, I won't get fat because there's no fat in it?

It's not what I think, it's what science says. The ability of the human body to make and store body fat from potatoes is severely lacking. Metabolism isn't magic. A kilo of potatoes actually isn't many calories, but I'm assuming you mean if you eat something like 3000 calories of potatoes a day, and assuming that's all you ate (maybe with some other lean foods), then yes you won't get fat because you don't have the building blocks for fat.

>>5819290
They're not fucking bad for you.

Here's some god tier food: Baked potato skins, line with shredded bacon and cheese and stuff the rest with rice pilaf. So good and filling.

>>5820330

>they're not bad for you
>posts a recipe involving bacon and cheese

>>5820290
Successful troll is successful. The reason Chinese are known for being skinny is much smaller portion sizes and they usually have to work their asses off. Low fat diets are notoriously ineffective in the US because portion size and activity level are far more determinative. Conversely, Mediterranean diets are high fat, but super healthy.

(i really hope for your sake you were being a troll)

>>5820315

You're going to have to show me a sauce if I'm going to believe you.

Or don't. I doubt you give a fuck either way if I believe you or not.

>>5820337

>The reason Chinese are known for being skinny is much smaller portion sizes and they usually have to work their asses off.

As we can see in this data sample from the Cornell China Study, even when you match people for sedentary lifestyle, even when you compare shorter people to taller people, even when the shorter people eat 11% more calories, the leaner diet makes for much leaner people. There's no trolling going on, you're just learning new things.

>Low fat diets are notoriously ineffective in the US

Of course they're ineffective, because Americans do not follow a low fat diet. America's idea of a low fat diet is adding "low fat" foods into their current high-fat diet and expecting to lose weight somehow.

>>5820345

I did, you just ignored it. I posted this page from a nutrition textbook

>>5820290

>>5819905
Amen.

>>5820354

So why the fuck does beer make me fat then? I eat a very low fat diet, but I've still got a beer belly.

And I didn't ignore your link, I just didn't really see it.

Seems to me that there's so little consensus on these things that you may as well do what you want. According to things I've read in the last couple of days, saturated fats are now good for you again, if you use coconut oil, duck fat tricks your body into burning other fats, olive oil is poison if you heat it up, and pork lard is good for you, so is butter.

I seriously grow confused.

>>5820385

I don't know, what kind of foods do you eat? Alcohol has an estrogenic, testosterone-lowering effect, which could cause you to store more body fat, and it may damage your organs and cause some distension in your mid-section, but it sounds like you're not actually "fat" all around

>Seems to me that there's so little consensus on these things that you may as well do what you want. According to things I've read in the last couple of days, saturated fats are now good for you again...

It can be hard to sift through fad diet bullshit and media crazed, misleading attempts at undermining conventional wisdom about nutrition, but at the center of the science, things are much more stable and understood than you may have been lead to believe. "Saturated fat is okay" catches on because people want to believe it, and nobody bothers to do their own research, and would rather listen to fringe internet nutcases who can present nutrition in a "cool" way with their biases fully present rather than listen to the boring "truth" that tells them they can't eat bacon with impunity.

I try to help people and spread knowledge that I've learned because, but sometimes people just don't want to know what's true, they just want to hear what they like and stick to it.

>>5820335
Bacon and cheese isn't bad for you either in moderation.

>>5820442

Of course it is, it's just more moderately bad for you

>>5820419

So beer is making me into a woman?

Maybe I'm pregnant?

>>5820469

>So beer is making me into a woman?

With every sip, you progessively crave penises

>>5819290
Everyone processes their food differently. If you don't have any links to diabetes in your family, a few carbs a week won't hurt you.
Some carbs are better than others.
I like brown rice the best.
Potatoes are in the nightshade family, I love them, but I limit how many times a month, I eat them.
Pasta, if not whole wheat has been linked to making some feel depressed or gloom.

>>5819290
The false discovery that carbs are bad for you is making you a retard.

>>5820474

They say the difference between a straight man and a bisexual is about four pints of Stella, so maybe there's something in what you say.

I'm going to get another beer. I'll report back.

>>5819290
Unrefined carbs, and hydrated carbs are best. Potatoes and other starchy roots are proably the best source. Dried carbs soak up stomach acids and processed carbs like pasta are complete trash that are more poison than actual food, because the nutritional spectrum is so incredibly narrow.

>>5821095

I thought that was the difference between a woman and the police responding to a domestic dispute?

>>5819290
>The discovery that carbs are bad for you is KILLING me.


suburban housewife please

>>5821148

Depends who you go home with, I suppose.

I'd forgotten that britfags ask for a pint of wifebeater though. Good times.

>>5820442
real bacon isn't, your salt/sugar-whatever-else-injected bacon is kind of shitty no matter what

>>5821061

"Carbs" aren't a food, they're a macronutrient component of a food

>>5821159

>REAL bacon isn't

don't be stupid, Brutus

>>5821176
don't make useless posts cunt

>>5821226

take your own advice. sugar isn't the reason bacon is unhealthy, idiot

>>5820315
>The ability of the human body to make and store body fat from potatoes is severely lacking.


Total fucking bollocks.

>>5821345

See >>5820290

It's a medical fact, no reason to go crazy over it

carbs are great for you.

>>5821353
I can't get those google book links to work on my phone but, because you read it in a book does not make it so.
You would have to be one hell of a vegan brainwashed idiot to think that only fatty foods make you fat.

>>5821382

Here's a screenshot of the page. This isn't about veganism, it's about basic facts of metabolism. I'm sorry you don't like science.

>>5821392
Looks like it came out of a vegan or Jehovah's witness propaganda pamohlet.

Carbs are the best source of calories. You should get most of your calories from carbs, secondary from protein and last from fat.

>>5821401
That's the old food pyramid from the 80s .
All the new research says it was wrong.

Fat is healthy .

>>5821400

It came from a nutrition textbook, with that article written by a professor from the University of California, considered "one of the world's leading universities in health science." I'm sure it sounds crazy to you, but I doubt you know anything about nutrition to begin with.

>>5821417

Are you a fan of the show Ancient Aliens by any chance?

>>5821421
I do know that most of what people though in the 90 is now considered incorrect.
Nutrition is a primitive science anon.

>>5821431

>I do know that most of what people though in the 90 is now considered incorrect.

Can you give some examples?

>>5821417
Carbs are healthy.

Are cyclists and runners unhealthy?

>>5821434

Polyunsaturates used to be the dingo's danglers but now they give you aids or cancer or aidscancer.

>>5821439

I see the problem, you've read internet blogs run by crazy people and you think the dumb things they say are true and accepted by anyone in the medical community

>>5821441
NPR is the news source that I trust. science friday.
Morning edition.
All things considered.

>>5821441

No for reals man, a doctor told me. You get cancer off of margarine now, you have to eat butter or coconut paste because it's safe for now, but who knows for how long?

>>5820301
>What do you mean?
I mean if you think eating fat is why people are fat, then by that logic, you must eat nuts, which is why your nuts.

>>5821467

why his nuts what?

>>5821457

I put more trust in actual doctors and nutrition scientists whose careers are based on actually finding this stuff out, rather than creating controversial journalism

Here's the American Heart Association's response to the "omega-6 is the worst thing ever" claim

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/119/6/902.full

The reason people are told to replace saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat in the first place is because we have consistent and overwhelming data that shows doing so is very beneficial for heart health. People making claims like "saturated fat is healthy now" or "omega-6 is the REAL problem" and saying "new data" proves it are effectively saying decades of data can just be thrown out the door when something new appears, and more often than not the "new data" used to make such a huge claim doesn't hold up to scrutiny when you actually investigate it. This is why it's only crazy internet bloggers who claim these things, rather than the world's leading scientists and health organizations.

>>5821491
i'm not going to read this. summarize it for me

>>5821522
Things are bad, stuff is sometimes not bad but also occasionally not good

>>5821491
>I put more trust in actual doctors and nutrition scientists

There is no consensus among those guys right now.
Your idea that there are just a few crackpots bucking the system is not correct.

>>5821522

>i'm not going to read this.

And here lies the issue. If you won't take the time to read and understand direct sources, you're never going to understand science.

>A large body of literature suggests that higher intakes of omega-6 (or n-6) polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) reduce risk for coronary heart disease (CHD).
>In studies with vascular endothelial cells, omega-6 PUFA had antiinflammatory properties, suppressing the production of adhesion molecules, chemokines, and interleukins, all key mediators of the atherosclerotic process.17 In human studies, higher plasma levels of omega-6 PUFAs, mainly AA, were associated with decreased plasma levels of serum proinflammatory markers, particularly interleukin-6 and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, and increased levels of antiinflammatory markers, particularly transforming growth factor-β
>Favorable effects of LA on cholesterol levels are thus well documented and would predict significant reductions in CHD risk. Additionally, higher LA intakes may improve insulin resistance30 and reduce the incidence of diabetes mellitus,31 and higher serum LA levels are associated with lower blood pressure
>a meta-analysis including 6 of these trials56–60,62–64 indicated that replacing saturated fatty acids with PUFAs lowered the risk for CHD events by 24%.66 Of the remaining 4 studies, 1 reported a significant 45% reduction in risk,
>To reduce omega-6 PUFA intakes from their current levels would be more likely to increase than to decrease risk for CHD.

>>5821543

>There is no consensus among those guys right now.

There are minor arguments on things, but the guys trying to flip everything on its ass are seen as crazy people. Every science has this. There are biologists who believe in creationism for example, but their insane disbelief in evolution doesn't mean there's a serious debate about it, it's just natural for every science to have a group of crazy people that say crazy things nobody else agrees with

>>5821562
This is just not true anon
Nutrition is a far more primitive science. Not at all the same as biology.
The rigor is not there.
Physicists are even coming in to try to clean up the long time culture of bad science.

>>5819290
NO SERIOUSLY GUISE

SWEET POTATOES

THEY ARE THE BEST NATURAL CARB SOURCE

PROVE ME WRONG BITCH NIGGAS I'M FROM /FIT/

I have to admit that these kinds of starchy products are the cause of my familys weight.

Since cutting back on how many I eat and which ones I eat i've easily lost 8kgs.
The problem isnt that its inheritantly bad for you, its just that you can easily find yourself eatting far too much of it, say you have toast in the morning, then rice for lunch, and have potato for dinner, shit adds up.

Moderation, It's in the first post, picking your battles aswell, I'll opt to make potato instead of pasta, brown rice instead of jasmine, and I avoid bread until the weekend.

>>5821599

>Nutrition is a far more primitive science

While we don't know everything about nutrition, many of the things we currently know, many of the things currently attempting to be contested by fringe groups, are understood well enough that they simply can't be turned around. Groups will always appear to spread some crazy disinformation and label the mainstream viewpoint "bad science," but they do this by preaching to scientifically uneducated lay men rather than arguing from within the science community. If the guy saying saturated fats are healthy or having high cholesterol is a good thing had an actual case to make, he wouldn't be operating a web blog, he'd be presenting such claims and evidence to other scientists and accepting his nobel prize and promotion to head of a recognized organization.

I'm not trying to be a dick, but the show Ancient Aliens is a good example of this. They can present things will enough by giving you half truths and with-holding information that the average person watching, unfamiliar with history or archaeology beyond what they're being told through the show, might begin to think King Tut was actually an alien, or that Mayan god myths are based on actual alien spaceships that visited people. The reason it's considered a crazy fringe belief despite seeming logically sound to the average person watching the show, is that it's much easier to convince the average person of something insane than it is to convince an expert. Fortunately for the people making this claim, they don't need to convince experts because they aren't trying to overthrow the establishment, they just want to grow an audience and rake in money.

>>5819290

Just eat them and get more exercise.

>>5821548
so omega 6 is healthier than saturated fat. what's the news here? omega 3 is still better

>>5821675

The point is that it's not news. It's a new claim popping up that saturated fat isn't harmful and that omega-6 is the real cause of cardiovascular disease, but that claim just doesn't hold up.

>>5819290
Potatoes, partially because they fill you up a lot better than the other two.

>>5821625
yeah, because there's nothing else you're eating that's making you fat. jesus christ

>you can't get fat unless you ingest fat
what the fuck am I reading
literally what the fuck

>>5821702

Almost as crazy as learning that gravity is different on other planets

>>5819352
that picture is hilarious

>>5821709
You are either a very good troll or literally retarded.

>>5821690
Not really, we have a very varied diet, its just that we eat too much bread and pasta and shit and don't do enough to work it off.

>>5821718
Gravity is a constant.

>>5819290
Polution and cigarette smoke is a 1000 times more bad for your health than anything you will ever eat or drink in your life.

>>5821732
fat is stored as fat. the conversion of carbohydrates to fat is an inefficient process that yields very little fat gain even when eating at extreme excess. the problem is people eat fat and carbs, then the body burns the carbs for fuel and stores the fat. if you cut out the fat from your diet you'll lose weight

>>5821718
you are literally not a thinker.

>>5821686
ok. i just remember you posting that link in regards to o-3 and o-6 balancing in another thread

>if I eat 20 pounds of boiled rice a day and nothing else
>it is literally impossible for me to get fat

Any problem with diet could be solved if we fucking got off our fat asses and exercised properly. You could live off of a diet of fast food and dog shit if only you exercised to make up for it and kept your essential nutrient levels stable.

>>5821798
If you ate nothing but 20 pounds of boiled rice every day and nothing else you would likely die from vitamin deficiency before getting fat.

>>5821803
>if I eat enough fat-free vegetables to meet my micronutrient needs to sustain life
>and also 20 pounds of rice a day
>I will never get fat

>>5821803
isn't it hard to die from vitamin deficiency?

>>5821798

I don't think you could eat 20 pounds of boiled rice, but while you would stimulate de novo lipogensis by eating that much for an extended period of time, it'd still be far less than you would expect for how many excess calories you eat. Why do you find it so hard to believe, even after being shown the facts from a science textbook, that fat is stored as body fat and carbohydrate is hard to convert into fat?

>>5821809
20 pounds? You'd die from a stomach rupture even without the vegetables.

>>5821803
isn't it difficult to die from vitamin deficiency?

>>5821809
and you will die eventually from an unhealthily low BF%

>>5821810
Scurvy would kill you in about four months assuming you didn't get hospitalized long before that.

>>5821809
rice is pure starch...how would you not get fat?

>>5821821
You cannot be serious.
Excess energy is stored as body fat
This can be dietary fat.
This can be proteins.
This can be carbohydrates.
If you eat 30% above how many calories you spend in a day for a month, you will get fat, regardless whether you actually ingested fat or not.

>>5821850
Ask >>5820290 and his piece of shit "study"

>>5821850
That was the point he was trying to make, except he went full retard by giving an amount of food far more than you could possibly eat in a single day.

Seriously, 20 pounds of rice. That's a big bag of rice every single day, something you could feed a family on for at least a fucking month. Not even the guy from Se7en could force feed someone that much food.

>>5821855

It's not even me you're arguing with at this point. You've been shown the science >>5820290

And yet you're still making up your own version of how the human body works. Publish your own science textbook if you think human metabolism is as simple as "every macronutrient reacts the exact same way and your body is 100% efficient at everything"

No carbohydrate is essential to the body but not getting enough dietary fiber will fuck you hardcore nutrient deficiency or no.

>>5821866
GAWD DAYUM

>>5821855
^DIS NIGGA GOT BURNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNED

>>5821870
...or no.

maybe

>>5821866
>DNL is minimal in nonobese, nonoverfed men
The study is saying that you don't gain weight from carbs if you don't overeat.

nothing about overeating
Did you even read it

>>5821877
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3513325/

>Dietary fiber intake also lowered risk of death from cardiovascular, infectious, and respiratory diseases by 24%–56% in men and 34%–59% in women.

Even the most hardcore conspiracytard ketofaggots admit that you should probably get at least some fiber in your diet.

>>5821881

Finish reading the article

>fat synthesis remained low, even on massively excessive carbohydrate intakes

Your body can create enough fat for what's physiologically necessary, but in most conditions it just doesn't have the ability to create excess body fat from carbohydrate, especially from glucose. Body fat storage is the role of dietary fat.

>>5821898
Mind giving the page number? It sounds like they just put people on all-carb diets rather than an excess of their TDEE.

>>5821914

Page 263.

The word "excess" tends to mean beyond one's needs, not within their total energy expenditure. If it was within their caloric needs, it wouldn't be excess. The fact that DNL was only observed to ramp up when people in a laboratory setting were fed 1250-1500 grams of carbohydate a day for over a week should tell you how difficult it is to induce the amount of DNL needed to put on significant body fat, and that's certainly not within someone's TDEE. Even at the unrealistically high levels needed to adequately produce fat, 25-28% of the calories are still being wasted in the conversion process.

>>5821971
Why doesn't the researcher flat-out say how many calories he fed them? Why doesn't he give their weights before and after He refers to some figures, yes, but those were from other studies.

I'm sorry, but I'm having trouble believing all this without those numbers.

If you're avoiding calories in general, probably toss out potatoes.
As good as all three are, pay attention to how they're served. Potatoes almost always involve extra fat(fried roasted, or mashed and butter added etc)

>>5821971
Are you studying nutrition, anon? Any books you'd recommend reading?

>>5821980
Fats aren't going to kill you. Just note how much you add and account for it.

Carbs aren't bad for you (when you eat them in moderation), but they aren't as filling as protein or fat, so people overeat them, and then everyone thinks they're bad for you.

The least unhealthy is obviously whole grains since they give you the most fiber.

>>5821977

They probably didn't think it would be necessary or that people would be so skeptical about a one-page explanation of fat storage in the middle of an entire chapter-long section on metabolism and biosynthesis. It's not that hard to believe when you think about it. How often do you see fat people eating very lean diets? This comparison was posted earlier too >>5820350

>>5821984
Maybe that's why I just said: If you're avoiding calories.
Avoiding calories is portion control, and when it comes to potatoes, most people instinctively toss a little extra in.

>>5821991
Most of the study was dedicated to stating that carbs do not magically turn into fat when not ingested in excess, and that much is obvious nowadays.
Saying that carbs cannot contribute to a gain in net adipose tissue at all is another claim entirely, and you'd want to back that up pretty strongly.

I'm skeptical of that particular image because people in rural China don't come across as living sedentary lifestyles. Body mass indices also do not account for muscle mass, so Americans having a slightly higher BMI is not that telling.

>>5822001

>I'm skeptical of that particular image because people in rural China don't come across as living sedentary lifestyles

It doesn't represent everyone in rural China, it's a data set of men who are in the lowest physical activity group, as in office type work, rather than something like field labor that you might associate with other rural Chinese

>Body mass indices also do not account for muscle mass, so Americans having a slightly higher BMI is not that telling.

True, but mass is mass and if calories are calories then you would expect the group eating more calories and not expending more energy would have more mass, whether it be fat or muscle, and the group eating less would weigh less. I don't think the average American, even at the time of this survey, was particularly muscley and lean though.

Purple potato master race.

>>5819933
that some iPhone shit? using chanu over here.

>>5820040
/ck/ is pretty much the best board
90% of funnyposting is funny
most regular posting is interesting/funny
everything is informative-ish
sorry /fa/ here you guys have a good thing going - only thing you're missing is more badly drawn comics

>>5821850

Some guy posted a textbook page so it must be legit because textbooks are always accurate and their authors are always the highest quality scientists.

Actually, they're not. I worked for a textbook company after I left university and I ended up working on a physics text and a sociology text even though I know nothing about either discipline and my degree's in English Literature.

>>5821995
>when it comes to potatoes, most people instinctively toss a little extra in.

This is completely true. I started dieting for the first time last year, and I started to actually weigh out potatoes and shit. I was amazed by how big the portions I was previously serving were - like easily a half kilo per person. I didn't even notice I was cooking so many, partly because I grew up with the idea that you should fill up on spuds, which is fine if you're a nordic skier or a farmer or whatever, but not so cool when you work in an office.

>>5822768

I should point out that I didn't actually weigh any shit. Figure of speech and all that.

>>5822382
browser

>>5822761
>my uncle works at nintendo

>>5823135

That's nice for you.

Regardless of your uncle, I really did write textbooks for a couple of years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/19/AR2010101907974.html

refers to a scandal that broke while I was working in the company. You'll note that the author referenced isn't a historian.

>The Virginia Department of Education has long said that its textbooks are vetted by review committees "made up of content specialists, teachers and other qualified persons." But department spokesman Charles Pyle said Thursday that the review committee for "Our Virginia" consisted entirely of three elementary school classroom teachers.

Basically, we'd write the book and it would go to some boffin who'd put his name on the cover. Some of them were assiduous in checking, others just rubberstamped it and waited for their royalty cheques.

I wouldn't blindly accept a textbook, they're not peer-reviewed and no matter how shit they are, they don't impact your academic career.

The guy in this thread telling people that bodyfat comes from dietary fat is a complete idiot.

>>5823135
Does he all the good cheats?

Pasta because of higher protein content

I've tried the butter + soy sauce combo with basmati rice and it's pretty damn good. Does it work with brown rice as well?

Can we get a vegetable power ranking in here? Both for flavour and nutrition.

>>5826903
It's okay i'd say (I tried it with butter) however I noticed for me brown rice is ideal for frying meanwhile basmati is pretty much for everything else.

>carbs are unhealthy
mfw I probably eat more white rice than other food groups combined
>soy sauce and oil
>fried egg
>those salted wavy seaweed packs
>kimchi
>chicken soup, with the fat on it
>shredded carrot, stir fried

>>5820124
I actually don't like sweet pahtatoes

>>5819446
>without sugar
Is often a code phrase that refers to replacing sugar with something that effects blood sugar even more than normal sugar

hey fags, get a load of this: I just ate pasta AND bread! No fucks were given!

Thanks for reading, take care x

>>5820159
Potatoes are new-world crops. They weren't available to Eurasians.

Certain roots were indeed consumed, but were never popular.

Mfw reading all these niggers argue about the health benefits of huge quantities of grains while I've already lost in excess of 80 pounds on a low-carb, high-fat diet.

>>5819290
id say rice is probably the least bad for you.

>>5827268

And others have lost weight eating nothing but twinkies and doritos. Whole grains are observably healthy for reasons beyond just weight loss. Congrats on losing weight, but unfortunately you're statistically much more likely to die of cardiovascular issues and probably cancer with your current diet.

>>5827329
I too, lose weight by eating nothing but a twinkie once a week.

>>5821392
Don't carbs turn into triglycerides, and triglycerides into fat?

I don't want to be one of these tinfoil hat question everything nutjobs, but do you have anything other than a page out of your textbook to back this up? Maybe some pubmed articles or papers?

>>5827960
He has nothing.
Of course carbs turn to fat.
Anyone at fit can tell you that.