Hacker News Reader

> 1. Don't eat processed food !!!!

This has become all but meaningless as what it means to be processed varies so much and has come to include almost anything. You mention pasta, yet many definitions include flour as being processed. I've seen it go so far as defining anything with salt added as processed (even by you right before you eat it).

What is a reasonable definition of processed food that you can actually use when shopping?

Something that has been mushed up from its original form to the point of being unrecognizable, bonus points for a bunch of different things mixed together, extra bonus points for containing things that were once in a big reaction vat.

> Something that has been mushed up from its original form to the point of being unrecognizable

So it does include flour and pasta?

Edit: olive oil and butter would also seem to fit the bill.

Flour is like the granddaddy of all processed foods. Yes, it is processed. Modern nutrition studies tend to suck, because they are laughably narrow. Flour is probably the biggest thing we have been capable of studying on a population scale. Throughout history, flour has made many populations unhealthy and fat.

Olive oil is hugely controversial. Don't expect an answer on that.

Processing foods tends to remove the stuff which is good for you. That's why "whole" grain is advocated. You would do even better to selectively eat the wheat germ! So let me make the controversial but empirically true statement that it's possible to make a food more healthy by processing it. The reason processed foods are bad is because of our taste bud and business incentives.

That's why it's extremely problematic to focus on food processing, as opposed to an underlying nutrient understanding. The first thing that goes when we process foods is the fiber, and this is missing nutrient number 1 in the American diet.

As long we lack an ability to talk about the truly root issues with diet, reducing processed foods will do nothing (given sufficient time). Companies will figure out a way to call something unprocessed, but still give the same bad composition of nutrients.

What's controversial about olive oil?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_oil_regulation_and_adulte...

http://www.google.com/search?q=olive+oil+controversy

How the controversy is basically labeling and fraud, not the oil itself, got it.

Even beyond that, it has lots of omega-6s. This is supposed to be competitive in cell chemistry with omega-3s, and the ratio is massively tilted in the omega-6 direction today.

And there's always the anti-fat faction. It's also a high calorie-density food. Like many of these topics, some people will argue that calorie density is irrelevant, but other people will disagree with them.

Maybe olive oil, without doing much research, might be an exception where it is not harmful, as long as you know where it is coming from and has not been adulterated or diluted.

One of the problem with processed food is that it allows large quantities, which often means lower quality. Also, you don't see what it's actually being made of.

For example, in the olives article, it cited an instance of sub-standard, damaged olives being used to make olive oil

>So it does include flour and pasta?

Yes, it does.

>Edit: olive oil and butter would also seem to fit the bill.

Indeed they would, unless you're making them yourself, or at least have an inkling of how, where, and by whom they were made.

Ok, fine, but do you realize you stepped in to make a clarification for what other commenter might have meant by "processed" where that commenter (ChuckNorris89) explicitly said to both: 1. not eat processed food, 2. eat pasta and olive oil?

> Something that has been mushed up from its original form to the point of being unrecognizable

Sauces are the enemy!

Yes they are. Sauces are some of the worst offenders, rarely less than 10 ingredients.

So no chocolate or coffee, then.

Coffee is hard to give up. I consider it a gray area if whole beans.

I think the easiest answer: If it comes in a box or a bag with a list of ingredients, consider it processed.

Occasionally eating something that comes in that form is okay - so making pasta from a once a week won’t kill you ( at least not quick enough to matter). But if you find yourself opening a box or bag of something every night, you may want to think harder.

Just my opinion, of course.

Is it a whole food or is it not? That's my only criteria. Sometimes whole foods could be argued as being processed and it wouldn't be wrong. I don't mince words over that, though. Uncooked non-brown rice is still rice, even if it went through some processing to get to me.

I'd make a couple tweaks... but double down on the don't eat processed foods, especially sugar. And add that you shouldn't be afraid of fat. I'd also suggest that some carb sources are better than others (barley or lentils over any form of wheat or soy). Of course, in general soy goes in the processed food category. Not to mention issues with GMO grains in general.

I'm also a solid believer in adding fasting cycles, reducing meal frequency etc.

I'd add to this: With abundant choices of carbs available, you can pretty much control weight gain based on which ones you consume. Sugar is first to go, followed by wheat, then corn, and at that point you're pretty much down to a collection of things that are hard to gain weight from (because they're a combo of fibrous and less exciting.) On the fruit side, bananas and grapes are probably worst, then apples and similar behind that, with berries being a somewhat safe bet on the other end.

See, the thing is, a lot of the latest research seems to suggest that healthy fats should make up a larger part of your diet, and that grains are actually pretty terrible for you. Like I said, it’s really not simple.

Additionally, a lot of plants require processing to be safe to eat, and many more are healthier if processed in some way. “Processed” is too generic to really mean anything.

Fibrous carbs? I've never come across broccoli being classed as a carb before.

I've heard it as 1/3 protein, 1/3 carb, 1/3 fruit and veg.

Most fruit and veg are also carbs.

The difference is between good fibrous carbs, the ones that are nutritious, filling and low on calories like most green vegetables including broccoli and spinach, and "bad" starchy carbs(note the commas) like potatoes, pasta or rice which are not very nutritious but are high in calories and sugars which our bodies need for energy.

Do you mean fibre when you say fibrous carbs?

By "fibrous carbs" he means foodstuffs which are fibrous (containing, consisting of, or resembling fibers), and whose energy mainly comes from carbohydrates (as opposed to fat or protein).

Or you can just eat nothing but beef ribs and have the body of an adonis. Be suspicious of all advice for nutrition. The best I’ve ever felt in my life I ate nothing but ultraprocessed pork sausages with cheese and kimchi for six months. Slimmed down and felt amazing.

If going carnivore, best to eat nose to tail and favor ruminants (pasture raised eggs are also a good option).

Also a good idea to add couple fasted days a month.

I eat a diet consisting mostly of starches, fat, and protein (including red meat), with some fruits added on (and basically no vegetables). I have a small stomach and live an active lifestyle so I have to load up on carbs to avoid getting exhausted during sports / activities. I also just dislike vegetables.

I got a bloodwork done at my last medical appointment and it came back perfect. High good cholesterol, low bad cholesterol, all the fats, proteins, etc. in the best ranges. The doctor then proceeded to go over all the things I must be doing right to have such good bloodworks but the only things I was actually doing were not ingesting too much sugar and exercising a lot. On everything else my diet basically consisted of the opposite of what is recommended.

> I got a bloodwork done at my last medical appointment and it came back perfect. High good cholesterol, low bad cholesterol, all the fats, proteins, etc. in the best ranges. The doctor then proceeded to go over all the things I must be doing right to have such good bloodworks but the only things I was actually doing were not ingesting too much sugar and exercising a lot. On everything else my diet basically consisted of the opposite of what is recommended.

Did the bloodwork include vitamin tests? If so, do you mind me asking what vitamins they tested for and how they came out?

I don't know why this is getting downvoted when it seems like a valid question to ask someone who does not eat any vegetables. Vitamin deficiencies can develop subtly into extremely serious problems. I have a condition that means I am more prone to them and, after having had mild scurvy, a vitamin D deficiency, a copper deficiency, a selenium deficiency, and many others, I would not wish them on my worst enemy. Most of the symptoms are basically not noticable, and develop so slowly that you don't realise them and tend to just get used to it, but they can cause A Lot Of Problems. Most of the main sources come from vegetables.

Also one should reduce added sugar as much as possible.

Which has also been even more concisely summarized as a seven word maxim:

Eat food. Mostly vegetables. Not too much

(in which "eat food" means 'real' food, not processed food)

> 2nd should be starchy carbs(pasta, rice or potatoes for example)

> 3rd should be fibrous carbs(broccoli, spinach or bell peppers for example)

Two thirds of what you recommend eating is carbs, no need to count calories, protein at dinner for muscle growth?

This is just a pile of very bad pseudoscience.