The Lie That You Need Fiber
The nanny staters are increasingly trying to control us, down to which morsels of food we put in our mouths, yet big cereal manufacturers like the dispensers of unhealth in the form of Fiber One are allowed to lie like hell on the TV about the supposed health of their products. (I heard yet another one of those spots this morning while listening to the politics and media shows on CNN.)
Luckily, there's Dr. Michael Eades to lay out the truth about fiber, which I try to eat very little of so I won't suffer its ill-effects. Eades blogs:
...Despite numerous studies showing that fiber doesn't really do squat for us healthwise, everyone continues to recommend it.To paraphrase John Huston: Evidence? We ain't got no evidence. We don't need no evidence. We don't have to show you any stinking evidence.
Into this society of bowel movement lovers a researcher comes along and writes a paper showing how fiber causes an increase in regularity. Our intrepid researcher's name is Dr. Paul L. McNeil; he is a cell biologist at the Medical College of Georgia. I'll let him tell how it all works.
When you eat high-fiber foods, they bang up against the cells lining the gastrointestinal tract, rupturing their outer covering. What we are saying is this banging and tearing increases the level of lubricating mucus. It's a good thing.Indeed?
He goes on:
It's a bit of a paradox, but what we are saying is an injury at the cell level can promote health of the GI tract as a whole....So, we have a situation where a product causes damage to the cells lining a tube, causing them to produce a lot of mucus in an attempt to protect themselves. In the process many of these cells die and are replaced by new cells. And this is perceived as a good thing.
Get all the goodies on the damage fiber does to you at the Eades link above.
Reminds me of the old SNL (If I remember correctly) skit about 'Colon Blow' cereal (it would take 30,000 bowls of regular cereal to match one bowl of Colon Blow!).
From the way our current crop of nutritional busybodies would have it, we should be eating mulch and compost to be healthy (followed by a bran muffin and a low fat latte).
I passingly mentioned my current weight in an earlier comment. What I didn't mention is that I've already dropped about 35 pounds since june, due to your mention of Dr Eades in an earlier post.
Since that worked, and the 'beaver menu' stew that my doctor keeps trying to push me towards doesn't, I'm planning to stay on the low carb one.
there are some who call me 'Tim?' at November 27, 2011 11:58 PM
More sarcasm than science. At this level of rhetoric, it makes perfect sense that cells, have performed their useful function, are best removed from the body. IIRC a third of each BM is this cell lining in any case. Yeah, sure: If my body's through with it, let's carry it away.
You're too eager to be smug about this stuff.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at November 28, 2011 6:52 AM
The only way to settle this for certain is to find one person who eats a lot of fiber, and another who doesn't, and see who is prettier.
clinky at November 28, 2011 7:01 AM
I don't understand how one can advocate paleo eating one minute and then denigrate fiber the next. Undomesticated plant species are mostly fiber and have less nutrition than domesticated plant species, in many hunter gatherer populations (the model of an optimal diet for paleo enthusiasts) this matter accounts for 70 or 80% of calories consumed. So, use an evolutionary argument when it endorses eating meat but abandon it when it endorses fiber?
DIana at November 28, 2011 7:04 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/28/the_lie_that_yo.html#comment-2811941">comment from DIanaUm, I'm not one of the "paleo" faddists. Because plants existed doesn't mean people ate them or evolved to process them. Fiber is very hard on the human body. Read Eades whole post; don't just lazily look at the tiny excerpt I posted.
Amy Alkon
at November 28, 2011 7:11 AM
I guess each person needs to be the judge of what works best for their own system. If a person has discomfort and fiber helps... so be it.
LauraGr at November 28, 2011 7:37 AM
> and see who is prettier.
Threadwin
Crid at November 28, 2011 7:44 AM
So, Amy, since that blog entry is so old, I wonder if the kind Dr. has any updates...
Interestingly LauraGr, seems as if there are minerals that we don't get as much anymore that often contribute to 'discomfort' and one is magnesium... I think Dr. Eades wrote on that once upon a time too.
Dunno, in talking to various Dr.s over the years, some really seem to want to know mechanisms for how things work, and some don't. My last doc fed me the straight party line on everything, including diet... but it's surprising how many Dr.s consider correlation to be causation... D'ya remember when high cholesterol was 300? Now it's 200... and they still bitch even if you are 170. "Oh, well you really need to eat right and exercise!" 'yeah? and why do you think I am not, what IS your measure?'
SwissArmyD at November 28, 2011 10:13 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/28/the_lie_that_yo.html#comment-2812464">comment from SwissArmyDThough probably most doctors will talk to you about the importance of lowering cholesterol, the lipid hypothesis has not been proved. Here's Eades on it:
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/uncategorized/the-lipid-hypothesis/
Taubes also wrote a NYT piece on it, but I have to be brief because I'm on deadline. Eades has pieces on magnesium on his site. I link to him because he's a source of solid science. If you get your dietary information from mainstream media or just think you know what dietary science says, you're probably eating quite unhealthily (like eating "healthy" whole grains, for example, which aren't healthy for you at all).
I assume my doctors don't know shit about science until proven otherwise. I got lucky with my shrink at Kaiser. My last primary care doctor I found that I could push around to give me science-based care. She's left. I'm hoping the one who took over will either be evidence-based or easy to make that way through use of studies (I have a friend pull them for me to show why I need the test I say I need.)
Amy Alkon
at November 28, 2011 10:32 AM
Don't get me started Swiss. My FNP has been pushing oatmeal on me as a source of fiber and to cut back on eggs and bacon. I made a real mistake being honest with him when I said I have eggs/bacon 3-5 times a week. Nevermind that since I started that over a year ago I'm eating less and feeling better. My cholesterol is high (175 area IIRC) and he wants to see if its genetic or just diet. Either way its more like he wants me on meds for it. I'm guessing its genetic given my family history but I'm also thinking my low thyroid which he put me on meds for is part of the problem of my high cholesterol level. That and I'm overweight.
Sio at November 28, 2011 10:39 AM
Sio, 175 ain't high... but the component ratios may be... Eades talks a lot more about triglycerides...
but the question I come back to often, is the difference between "normal" and "individual"
Dr.s push numbers that occur in a general population... but there is always individual variability. It gets tougher to say what's right at that level.
SwissArmyD at November 28, 2011 10:57 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/28/the_lie_that_yo.html#comment-2812524">comment from SioSio, in brief, it's LDL particle size your doctor should be worried about:
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cardiovascular-disease/are-all-diets-the-same/
In brief, because I'm on deadline, large and fluffy, good; small and dense, bad.
Amy Alkon
at November 28, 2011 10:57 AM
Distantly related dietary madness: Finnish officials want to take low-carb kids into custody. "
Finnish officials have told a family of low-carbohydrate enthusiasts that their children would be taken into care if they failed to heed nutrition advice, provincial paper Iisalmen Sanomat reported Sunday." More here: http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/htimes/domestic-news/general/17412-finnish-officials-mull-taking-children-into-care-over-low-carb-diet.html
Rose at November 28, 2011 12:06 PM
Not related at all, but it does have butter, so maybe it's sort of related. Try this recipe for hot-buttered rum. It's one of the best drinks I've ever tasted.
It has sugar and rum, so it's definitely not low-carb, but it also has butter. Life is too short to not ever have tried this.
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/emeril-lagasse/hot-buttered-rum-cocktail-recipe/index.html
MonicaP at November 28, 2011 2:51 PM
>>It has sugar and rum, so it's definitely not low-carb, but it also has butter. Life is too short to not ever have tried this.
Ima thinking adding some bacon would make that about perfect. Theoretically.
LauraGr at November 28, 2011 5:05 PM
Leave a comment