Common Dieting Myths

Wherever science meets government, always be suspicious. This blog frequently delves into the ludicrous theories that are often taken as standard dogma in fields like physics, biology, and climate studies, although the same pattern seems to hold regardless of the domain. At some point, more funding does more harm than good. The truly brilliant minds can normally get their work funded - or at least, I think we can agree that they should be funded. Once they are taken care of, more money means more meddling midwits who aren't likely to make significant scientific breakthroughs, but can certainly craft a grant application to match the acceptance rubric. People commonly believe that funding more scientists means that more good science is likely to occur, in the way that a whole team of prospectors is more likely to find nuggets of gold in a rocky stream. In reality, it just means more dependency on a federal funding narrative, where the truly creative insights are drowned out if not shunned altogether. It results in a brittle orthodoxy that is incapable of challenging its own basic assumptions. We've seen it time and time again. Scientists are willing to construct extravagant theories consisting of deeply nested unproven hypotheticals in order to avoid questioning core beliefs.

The most ludicrous theoretical construct in the more serious sciences that I'm aware of is the neutron star. It's the kind of thing you get when you couple publish-or-perish career progression with heavy government funding, particularly the NSF's preference to fund "high-risk, high-yield" research in hopes of finding the big breakthroughs. These kinds of results often range between amusing and annoying, but there is aways some degree of moral outrage because the government has stolen the money from taxpayers for such research. I do not consent to have my income highly taxed only to be rewarded with such national embarrassments. Even worse, however, is that the scientific consensus can actually be harmful. Of course, we're quite aware that climate-change theories - such as the consistently failing IPCC models - are being used to make disastrous economic decisions that have caused rolling blackouts in once first-world nations like Australia, and soon Germany. But on a more personal, day-to-day level, the government has for decades promoted bad nutrition advice, and continues to do so.

The most well-known governmental health advice was the iconic food pyramid with its broad base of grains and thin peak of meats and proteins. Nearly everyone I know who is dieting is on some sort of low-carb diet. Keto diets, which are extreme versions of carb cutting, are somewhat trendy. Thankfully, rejection of the food pyramid is common amongst actively health-aware dieters. But, mainstream nutrition beliefs and official government guidance have only slightly improved. The current model is ChooseMyPlate.gov, which was unveiled by First Lady Michele Obama. She said,

As long as half of their meal is fruits and vegetables alongside their lean proteins, whole grains and low-fat dairy, then we're good. It's as simple as that.

The increased emphasis on vegetables is the only real improvement. But overall, it still delivers the same message that made the food pyramid so dangerous: fats are bad, carbs are good. Harvard University released a modified version of the plate recommendations.

Harvard's plate features a higher ratio of vegetables to fruits, adds healthy oils to the recommendation, and balances healthy protein and whole grains as equal quarters of the plate, along with recommending water and suggesting sparing dairy consumption. 

Their model at least recognizes that fruits aren't that healthy and that oils are necessary. Other than the recommendation to avoid dairy, it's an improvement. Let's look at some specific examples of bad nutritional advice commonly promoted.

Grains are fundamental
Grains are unnecessary and should be limited, if not avoided entirely. They are ubiquitous because they grow well in European and North American climates and are easily transported and stored throughout winter. They became popular despite human dietary preferences. Grains consist mostly of carbohydrates and drive a massive insulin spike when consumed, which lowers metabolism and puts the body into fat-storing mode. Carbohydrates are primary fuels of the body, but are toxic in excess. After eating conventional meals, I frequently enter sneezing fits, which can be embarrassing in restaurants. I could never narrow the culprit down to any particular food allergy, but if I moderately limit carbs then the sneezes don't occur. Grains and excess carbs are an irritant to the body and cause all kinds of auto-immune disorders, as well chronic fatigue syndrome.

Fat is bad
People assume that fat in the body is caused by fat in food. Thus, we see the almost unquestioned assumption made by food producers and consumers that reduced fat is synonymous with healthy. It continues today, even with all the popularity of keto, paleo, and Atkins diets. Not only are fats essential as building blocks for our cell membranes, they are a preferable source of energy than carbohydrates. Fats and proteins are complex macromolecules. They are harder to digest than simple sugars, which are easily digested and consumed. In our evolutionary environment, food was scarce, thus we are designed to seek out sugar as the most efficient way to fuel the body. Even then, it was often feast or famine. Gorge on fruit when it comes in season, and the resulting belly fat will help you survive the winter. Today, there is no winter, and fruits never go out of season. So a high-fat diet is actually more natural, since we evolved to build up fat stores and then live off them in lean times. High-fat diets cause less fat accumulation on the body, because carbs eaters must eat every few hours to stave off hunger pangs.

There is a sub-myth that you should strain the fat out of ground beef. Most people do this without thinking about it. Of course, the recipes often mention it. The Hamburger Helper package says to strain the meat, probably because they can then put lower saturated fat values on the nutrition label. They know the populace has been trained to think fat is bad. The proper way to make Hamburger Helper is to buy the cheapest (i.e. least lean) beef at the store, and then don't strain it. It tastes better and makes for a healthier meal. It's amusing that the same people who will pay a premium for the fatty cut of beef in the steakhouse will go pay a premium for the lean beef in the grocery store, and then strain the best part into a jar.

Breakfast is the most important meal of the day
The logic of this is that meals should be eaten when we're active so that calories are consumed rather than stored as fat. Further, we are told that eating breakfast "kick starts" our metabolism in the morning, causing us to burn more calories throughout the day. Question, do you feel that your metabolism kicks in after a meal? Or do you feel kinda feel like lying down for a nap? The reality is that eating causes an insulin spike which lowers metabolism for several hours. Carbs have the biggest effect, and fats the least. Breakfast literally means "break fast" because it comes about 12 hours after the evening meal, which is where fasting mode begins. Eating in the morning takes the body out of a high metabolism fat-burning mode and back into feeding mode.

Some breakfast foods, like eggs and sausage, are very healthy, but should be eaten later in the day. Do cereal commercials on TV still boast "part of this complete breakfast" and then depict a child eating cereal, toast, fruit, and juice? Part of this ADHD diagnosis, more like. I do find it disturbing that we outlaw marijuana in this country to protect children, but then allow corporations to market and sell pure sugar to them as breakfast foods. Pop-Tarts should be banned, and all who push them incarcerated as felons. Do an experiment. First thing in the morning, eat a big bowl of cereal (skim milk only!), some healthy, nutritious whole-grain bread (no butter!), and a big glass of orange juice with all its yummy vitamin C. If 2-3 hours later you don't feel like absolute shit, then your body functions completely different than mine and you should ignore all the dieting advice in this post.

Eat many small meals per day
If physics, statistically the highest IQ field of study, can come up with such intellectual flops as neutron stars, imagine what the dummies in the other fields can do. When I was in college, I was amused by a gym poster that gave nutritional advice for various fitness goals. Trying to lose weight? You should eat 5-6 small meals per day. Trying to gain weight? You should eat 5-6 small meals per day. Training for athletic competitions? You should...well you get the idea. This advice is right up there with loading your child up with carbs before school. The belief is that fasting causes the body to go into "starvation mode" where it lowers metabolism and hordes all available nutrients as fat. The human body has evolved to store excess food as fat, and then consume it when needed. But we're supposed to believe that it responds to lean times by...storing more fat?? Fortunately for us, the human body did not evolve to be so stupid, unlike the modern dietician. Maybe that's not fair to say. Dieticians have just evolved to survive lean times too. They know that obese dieters naturally select for diets where they get to eat all day long, rather than the ones advising them to eat just once per day.

Eating all day means your body is constantly in high-insulin, fat storage mode. Eating all day, even in small amounts, ensures you won't lose weight and will always feel tired. Worse, the body becomes accustomed to the high insulin and even more carbs are needed to satiate hunger. If their theory was correct, then fasters in "starvation mode" should be extremely hungry, while the many small meal "dieters" should never feel hungry. But they're the ones who constantly say they're starving! Popular dieting advice amounts to feels over reals, it seems.

If you want to feel best, shift to a low-carb, high-fat diet with long stretches between meals. Skip breakfast, eat a light lunch with as few carbs as possible, and eat a big dinner to consume most of your daily calories. It's okay to permit some carbs, since they will be stored as fat and consumed during the day while your body is in ketosis. Of course, take it easy, because excess amounts of carbs are still bad for the body, and you're likely to become groggy and lose productive hours in the evening. I find that, once I get accustomed to a proper low-carb diet, it becomes somewhat self-reinforcing. Cheating feels like freedom from an oppressive dieting regimen, but then you feel like crap, and learn to avoid it. Eventually, a cookie doesn't even sound very appealing.