Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/09/2002 11:00:48 AM PDT by sourcery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: sourcery
If one doesn't eat red meat, weight will not likely be a problem.
2 posted on 07/09/2002 11:09:10 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sourcery
Good post
3 posted on 07/09/2002 11:12:17 AM PDT by IdeashaveConsequences
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sourcery
Now that this science is becoming clear, it has to fight a quarter century of anti-fat prejudice

Not to worry, a quarter century of drug prejudice prevails in light of science. The government plans to move forward with a plan to end self destructive behaviors like taking drugs and eating wrong. We will soon have helicopters flying over to force the cattle growers indoors.

Eating approved food will become a right. The government will establish a dietary protection agency in which all the properly approved beans and rice will be equally available. After all it is the government's duty to protect us from what we ingest. Eating fat might hurt my family if I die and leave my children to suffer.

4 posted on 07/09/2002 11:15:14 AM PDT by Lysander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sourcery
What's forgotten in the current controversy is that the low-fat dogma itself is only about 25 years old. Until the late 70's, the accepted wisdom was that fat and protein protected against overeating by making you sated, and that carbohydrates made you fat. In ''The Physiology of Taste,'' for instance, an 1825 discourse considered among the most famous books ever written about food, the French gastronome Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin says that he could easily identify the causes of obesity after 30 years of listening to one ''stout party'' after another proclaiming the joys of bread, rice and (from a ''particularly stout party'') potatoes. Brillat-Savarin described the roots of obesity as a natural predisposition conjuncted with the ''floury and feculent substances which man makes the prime ingredients of his daily nourishment.'' He added that the effects of this fecula -- i.e., ''potatoes, grain or any kind of flour'' -- were seen sooner when sugar was added to the diet.

True. I remember asking my dad when I was a kid why so many poor people were fat, and he told me it was because they couldn't afford meat and ate mostly starchy foods. That was just common sense back in the days before the junk food/junk science alliance convinced Americans that carbs were good for you and meat was bad.

7 posted on 07/09/2002 11:34:05 AM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: sourcery
Let me chime in -

80 pounds off in 5-6 months, and 6 months later its all still off. I feel great. Had about 25 chicken wings with blue cheese last night.

It's one of the best things I've ever done.

24 posted on 07/09/2002 1:58:03 PM PDT by NCLou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson