CICO is the hoary old acronym used to designate the Calories-In-Calories-Out nutritional paradigm. It is pure bunk, and I can prove this with a simple example. Does anyone in their right mind think that, say, the nutrition provided by 2000 calories of sugar is precisely equal to that of 2000 calories of beef?
Didn't think so. To be sure the above is an obviously nonsensical comparison, but nevertheless it's taken as gospel by most of the public and the medical establishment. The major problem with this mindset is that we humans do not have a steam engine in our innards that is "burning" the food we eat. What we do have is a metabolism that processes the macro-nutrients of fat, protein, and carbohydrates differently. Radically different in fact, to put it as mildly as possible.
It is best to think of food intake as "volume" not calories. If one is in fact eating very nutritionally and energy dense food, such as meat, then the volume of that intake will be much lower than what is "normal" on the wretched Standard American Diet. It is easily possible that one can nearly starve on, say, 700 S.A.D grams of food per diem, and quite dramatically thrive on 700 grams of animal products. This process is strongly abetted by the fact that consuming protein and fat results in much higher satiety signals from the old gray matter. Some aver that a very low carb way of eating is a "fasting mimicking" situation. To whatever extent that is true, it is a thing much to be desired.
Add up these crucial differences and the result is that a high-carb diet is in every way grossly unhealthy, and a very low-carb diet is not. And a near zero-carb diet is healthiest of all in the short, medium, and long term. Carbohydrate toxicity is the bane of modern society in too many ways to count. Toxic it most certainly is, and viciously addictive. Among the numerous addictions of our world, carb addiction may well be the worst in terms of the overall health of that world. It can be as hard to kick as smoking, drinking, and opiate use. Stop the madness, dammit. Go low, live long, and prosper.
I have done no serious research on the Atkins or the Paleo diet, but I know what I see. My 76 year old brother is very serious about avoiding carbs, subsists on protein and fat, and has the physique and mental acuity of a healthy young man. I believe the same would work for me, but do not see any reason to make such serious lifestyle changes only to delay the inevitable. As much as I disagree with members of the Emanuel family politically, I agree with Zeke Emanuel that there is no real point in medical intervention after the age of 75.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how your brother is doing, but I could scarcely be doing better on ultra low-carb. I am 75 and have been eating carnivore for over five years. I'm at a good weight, on no prescription meds, have no GI issues of any sort, psoriasis is gone, esophageal ulcer gone, no joint pain or issues, zero signs of cognitive decline, and quite a few other startling improvements. I am in fact healthier in every respect than I was at 40. 75 is in no way whatsoever too late to start such a lifestyle.
ReplyDelete