Message from discussion New Fat Bashing - "A Taste For Fat"

Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!panix!proto
From: Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb
Subject: Re: New Fat Bashing - "A Taste For Fat"
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:07:10 -0500
Organization: None
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <proto-0706FD.17070911032010@news.panix.com>
References: <hnbc5b$mon$1@news.eternal-september.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-71-190-68-66.nycmny.east.verizon.net
X-Trace: reader1.panix.com 1268345230 11028 71.190.68.66 (11 Mar 2010 22:07:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:07:10 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b2 (Intel Mac OS X)

In article <hnbc5b$mo...@news.eternal-september.org>,
 pamela <bicycleguy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I suppose that they didn't include any low carbohydrate WOE folks in 
> teir "fat eaters" -- just as they probably didn't correlate with total 
> calories consumed either or the other macronutrients.

Outside the low carbers and a few other health nuts, everybody in the US 
certainly is maintaining on sugar and the others are mostly glucose 
addicts. Even some low carbers believe that whole grains are better than 
the refined stuff. Beside the paradigm is carbs making up the bulk of 
the diet.

People lie awake nights trying to figure new ways to get it into new 
foods, that is if they can't put HFCS in them. HCFS is basically the 
same as sugar anyway.

Many moons ago when I was into low fat dieting, I looked at a package of 
brown rice for the nutritional content and saw it was mostly 
carbohydrates even the amount of fiber was not impressive. "Must have 
some other benefit", I thought. That was back in the day, I was being 
told to cut my fat to 5% by calories. Brown rice has 7% and apples have 
5%. Hard to do a diet of whole foods on that WOE.

-- 
 A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.