Food nutrition chart

[undeather]

Quote

If you want a real deal, look into Nick Hiebert's (Nutrivore) Nutri Dex, so far the best assessment tool of its kind that helps you manipulate the spreadsheet many different ways. 

Nick embodies the quintessential "wicked smart" archetype—someone with the potential to revolutionize the way we understand and engage with nutritional information by building a powerful personal brand. However, his brilliance is overshadowed by an unmistakable arrogance, a propensity for harsh judgment (vegan), and an immaturity that makes him, frankly, one of the most insufferable individuals I've had the misfortune of encountering.

Edited Sunday at 12:32 PM by undeather

[Schizophonia]

On what is based this notation ?

If it's about calories it's hard enough to eat a few dozen calories of kale in one meal.

[WelcometoReality]

1 hour ago, Yimpa said:

Makes me realize that I need to seriously eat more vegetables and less meat. Dr. Furman does make a good point about that. I disagree with him about olive oil though. I think the extra virgin is top tier.

Yeah. It inspire me to eat more vegetables. But I couldn't go all the way and eat a totally nutritarian diet. No way. 😆

I like olive oil too. The only reason it gets a low score is because it's so calorie dense. But it feels yummy in my tummy. 

[WelcometoReality]

14 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

Btw I saw you’re from Sweden too. Hi👋🏻

Oh cool. Where in Sweden do you live if I may ask? 🙂

[WelcometoReality]

6 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

On what is based this notation ?

If it's about calories it's hard enough to eat a few dozen calories of kale in one meal.

I added some info on how the score is calculated in the topic.

[undeather]

2 minutes ago, WelcometoReality said:

Yeah. It inspire me to eat more vegetables. But I couldn't go all the way and eat a totally nutritarian diet. No way. 😆

I like olive oil too. The only reason it gets a low score is because it's so calorie dense. But it feels yummy in my tummy. 

Extra virgin olive oil is propably the best studied source of dietary fat and throughoutly correlated with positive health outcomes.
Low-fat, vegan dietary patterns, like the one proposed by Dr. Fuhrman, perform WORSE when compared to a plant based diet with healthy fat sources (EVOO/nuts/seeds/avocados,fish...).

Fat, especially unsaturated fat, is not your enemy - it's your friend.

[WelcometoReality]

2 minutes ago, undeather said:

Extra virgin olive oil is propably the best studied source of dietary fat and throughoutly correlated with positive health outcomes.
Low-fat, vegan dietary patterns, like the one proposed by Dr. Fuhrman, perform WORSE when compared to a plant based diet with healthy fat sources (EVOO/nuts/seeds/avocados,fish...).

Fat, especially unsaturated fat, is not your enemy - it's your friend.

According to which study? 

Also it's a big difference eating nuts, seeds and avocado to eating a processed oil don't you think?

 

[undeather]

6 minutes ago, WelcometoReality said:

According to which study? 

Also it's a big difference eating nuts, seeds and avocado to eating a processed oil don't you think?

 

It is not accurate to rely on a single study to declare one dietary approach superior, as both plant-based and other diets can appear favorable when selectively cherry picked. However, when examining the broader body of evidence—particularly secondary metrics such as adherence to dietary patterns and hard endpoint data like cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality—the most health-promoting dietary pattern emerges as one that is plant-based, incorporates adequate protein intake, and emphasizes high-quality fats. This includes extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), fish, nuts, seeds, and avocados.

This is not to diminish the health benefits of low-fat vegan diets, which are excellent choices for those who prefer them. However, there is no compelling scientific justification to exclude oils, yogurt, or other sources of unsaturated fats when calorie intake is appropriately managed. Ultimately, the focus should be on adopting a balanced and sustainable dietary pattern tailored to individual needs and preferences.
 

Quote

Also it's a big difference eating nuts, seeds and avocado to eating a processed oil don't you think?

While you could argue that nuts, seeds, and avocados might offer a slight edge in terms of health benefits, the evidence supporting this distinction is not particularly robust. That said, this is not a matter worth stressing over. Incorporating both types of healthy fats in reasonable quantities ensures you are well-covered from a dietary perspective. Balance and moderation remain the key to a well-rounded, health-promoting diet.

[Schizophonia]

42 minutes ago, WelcometoReality said:

I added some info on how the score is calculated in the topic.

Ok mea culpa.

I guess phytochemicals make the bill go up considerably.

[WelcometoReality]

6 minutes ago, undeather said:

It is not accurate to rely on a single study to declare one dietary approach superior, as both plant-based and other diets can appear favorable when selectively cherry picked. However, when examining the broader body of evidence—particularly secondary metrics such as adherence to dietary patterns and hard endpoint data like cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality—the most health-promoting dietary pattern emerges as one that is plant-based, incorporates adequate protein intake, and emphasizes high-quality fats. This includes extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), fish, nuts, seeds, and avocados.

This is not to diminish the health benefits of low-fat vegan diets, which are excellent choices for those who prefer them. However, there is no compelling scientific justification to exclude oils, yogurt, or other sources of unsaturated fats when calorie intake is appropriately managed. Ultimately, the focus should be on adopting a balanced and sustainable dietary pattern tailored to individual needs and preferences.

Yeah a meta analysis is of course better than a single study. 

That's quite a big claim you're making without backing it up with any references at all. Basically what you're claiming is that you've torn through all the science there is and arrived to a totally unbiased conclusion. Maybe I'm straw manning here, please tell me if I do. 🙂

I do agree with you on many things. Plant based seems like the best option towards health. High or low fat against cardiovascular disease, well im not sure. The only study I know was Dr. Esselstyns with a low fat vegan diet that cured cardiovascular disease. And that study was even repeated. So in my opinion low fat wins that race but maybe there's some other studies I'm missing.

48 minutes ago, undeather said:

Ultimately, the focus should be on adopting a balanced and sustainable dietary pattern tailored to individual needs and preferences.

That's key in my opinion. If it's not tailored towards that it can't be maintained. The needs from an optimal health perspective though, that's hard to figure out. 

[WelcometoReality]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

Ok mea culpa.

I guess phytochemicals make the bill go up considerably.

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean the food bill?

[undeather]

7 minutes ago, WelcometoReality said:

Yeah a meta analysis is of course better than a single study. 

That's quite a big claim you're making without backing it up with any references at all. Basically what you're claiming is that you've torn through all the science there is and arrived to a totally unbiased conclusion. Maybe I'm straw manning here, please tell me if I do. 🙂

I do agree with you on many things. Plant based seems like the best option towards health. High or low fat against cardiovascular disease, well im not sure. The only study I know was Dr. Esselstyns with a low fat vegan diet that cured cardiovascular disease. And that study was even repeated. So in my opinion low fat wins that race but maybe there's some other studies I'm missing.

That's key in my opinion. If it's not tailored towards that it can't be maintained. The needs from an optimal health perspective though, that's hard to figure out. 

I am giving you a shortcut version of the scientific consensus across different expert associations - nothing controversial really.
I am also a practicing MD (internal medicine), PhD with a focus on lipidology/gastroenterology - so I have done quite my due dilligence  

Sure, I could post landmark studies like PREDIMED or adherence reviews looking at the mediterranian diet. 
I could also post studies which - on a superficial level - debunk what I say. 

Or post a meta analysis - propably the highest quality one ever done this issue:



What I want to hint at here is that nutrtion science is complex and you can't prove/disprove a proposition simply by posting "a study". We look back a almost 100 years of important nutrition studies and the evidence builds up towards a certain conclusion which is most likely true. You also need to look a methodology and important limitations - which brings us to Essestyn: Some of his claims just don't really hold up under scrutiny - without going into too much detail myself, here is a video from 2 vegans looking at his "reverse CAD" claims:
 

 

[Sugarcoat]

2 hours ago, WelcometoReality said:

Oh cool. Where in Sweden do you live if I may ask? 🙂

Stockholm

[WelcometoReality]

3 hours ago, undeather said:

What I want to hint at here is that nutrtion science is complex and you can't prove/disprove a proposition simply by posting "a study". We look back a almost 100 years of important nutrition studies and the evidence builds up towards a certain conclusion which is most likely true. You also need to look a methodology and important limitations

Of course not, I'm aware that you can't draw such conclusions. But if you are claiming something then that's the least you could give me to look into it right? 

 

3 hours ago, undeather said:

I am giving you a shortcut version of the scientific consensus across different expert associations - nothing controversial really.
I am also a practicing MD (internal medicine), PhD with a focus on lipidology/gastroenterology - so I have done quite my due dilligence  

I hope your not appealing to authority here. 🙂 It's impressive though I'll give you that. I've heard doctors isn't given alot of education in nutrition. Is that true?

3 hours ago, undeather said:

Sure, I could post landmark studies like PREDIMED or adherence reviews looking at the mediterranian diet. 
I could also post studies which - on a superficial level - debunk what I say. 

Or post a meta analysis - propably the highest quality one ever done this issue:

Thanks I'll look through the links!

3 hours ago, undeather said:

which brings us to Essestyn: Some of his claims just don't really hold up under scrutiny - without going into too much detail myself, here is a video from 2 vegans looking at his "reverse CAD" claims:
 

That really brought me down the rabbit hole. So he isn't refuting that a high carb low fat plantbased diet is beneficial. Just that the paper doesn't prove the reversal of stenosis. Also seems like he's critisism has gotten critisism from other doctors.

This is quite irrelevant to me. I don't really care whether the plaques disappear or not. Unless there is another study that can make the claim that some other diet can reverse it. 

I'll just leave this pedantic discussion to someone else.

[undeather]

Quote

I've heard doctors isn't given alot of education in nutrition. Is that true?

I guess it depends on the country/university you go to - but yes, in general it's really bad.
I can't even remember learning anything about nutrition in med school.

 

Quote

 

That really brought me down the rabbit hole. So he isn't refuting that a high carb low fat plantbased diet is beneficial. Just that the paper doesn't prove the reversal of stenosis. Also seems like he's critisism has gotten critisism from other doctors.

This is quite irrelevant to me. I don't really care whether the plaques disappear or not. Unless there is another study that can make the claim that some other diet can reverse it. 

I'll just leave this pedantic discussion to someone else.

 

You might want to look into this
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.033214#:~:text=The Mediterranean diet produced a,the number of carotid plaques.

[Schizophonia]

4 hours ago, WelcometoReality said:

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean the food bill?

No i meant how it is based to calculate the food score.

If you put the foods in chronometer you see that the foods on the left consumed in normal proportion are not so nutritious and there are foods on the right that are.

It's like a completely biased way to sell a vegan weight loss diet.

[Schizophonia]

31 minutes ago, undeather said:

I guess it depends on the country/university you go to - but yes, in general it's really bad.
I can't even remember learning anything about nutrition in med school.

 

You might want to look into this
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.033214#:~:text=The Mediterranean diet produced a,the number of carotid plaques.

The diet of Paleolithic humans consisted primarily of fatty meats and some nuts, fatty fruits, and soft tubers/roots.

The high-carb diet has no archaeological sense, it is normal that it does not obtain good results even on those who promote it.

 

[undeather]

30 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

The diet of Paleolithic humans consisted primarily of fatty meats and some nuts, fatty fruits, and soft tubers/roots.

The high-carb diet has no archaeological sense, it is normal that it does not obtain good results even on those who promote it.

 

This is a good example of what Leo calls "lower perspective" in his latest video. 
Not how it works buddy

Edited Sunday at 07:36 PM by undeather

[Schizophonia]

17 minutes ago, undeather said:

This is a good example of what Leo calls "lower perspective" in his latest video. 

A postulate based on simple reasoning can be true, a postulate based on complicated reasoning that involves more data and/or logical patterns can be false.

Systematically preferring the more complicated arguent only serves your will to protect your ego, believe system and is anti-dialectical.

 

Edited Sunday at 07:46 PM by Schizophonia

[Schizophonia]

30 minutes ago, undeather said:

 

Not how it works buddy

No even if it annoys you it is perfectly logical.

1) Humans have evolved around a diet rich in meat, especially seafood, fish and small game. So a diet rich in fat.

2) Humans have not evolved massively around the consumption of nuts or avocados, the fats available in abundance in this evolutionary process are essentially if not systematically of animal origin.
Some very important fats only exist in animals (EPA / DHA), although there are marginal traces of manufacture of consumption of flax seeds, for example, in the Paleolithic (in Europe from memory)

3) As humans have evolved on a diet rich in fat, diets rich in vegan fats are automatically more effective than low fat ones in reducing mortality from all causes, among other things.

Now we should do studies on paleo diets, maybe it already exists i don't know. 

Edited Sunday at 07:59 PM by Schizophonia