The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8232 |
Page 1 of 3 |
Author: | Müs [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:17 am ] |
Post subject: | Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. |
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusiv ... ggets.html Quote: A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.
The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day. The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs — including in-home day care centers — to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home. |
Author: | Mookhow [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:22 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. |
How do 3 chicken nuggets meet the USDA requirements of: "one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables"? |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:49 am ] |
Post subject: | Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. |
It was all on her tray. The fact she didn't eat it was irrellivant. I wondered if the lady couldn't have just kept two cans I v8 juice in the lunch box perpetually and it would have counted. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:08 am ] |
Post subject: | |
Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:20 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. Interesting since I have never met a healthy vegetarian and human biology would indicate that this is a falsehood. |
Author: | Hannibal [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:43 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. I've also seen studies that smoking is good for your lungs, a Paleo diet makes you live longer, coffee enemas make you live longer, and erratic sleep cycles make you live longer. Find the conclusion you want, and I bet there is a study that will support it, and plenty more to refute it. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:55 am ] |
Post subject: | Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. |
I fail to see what any of this has to do with the issue at hand. According to some other things I've heard on this, Meet and dairy substitutes would have met the requirements. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:47 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hopwin wrote: Arathain Kelvar wrote: Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. Interesting since I have never met a healthy vegetarian and human biology would indicate that this is a falsehood. What human biology would that be? I've never met an unhealthy vegetarian. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:51 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hannibal wrote: Arathain Kelvar wrote: Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. I've also seen studies that smoking is good for your lungs, a Paleo diet makes you live longer, coffee enemas make you live longer, and erratic sleep cycles make you live longer. Find the conclusion you want, and I bet there is a study that will support it, and plenty more to refute it. /shrug. Haven't seen a study that says eating meat regularly is better for you. I have seen studies that say eating fish and/or meat on occasion is not bad. Like you say, draw your own conclusions - I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm just basing my opinion on what evidence is available, not on what I want to hear. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:57 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: Hopwin wrote: Arathain Kelvar wrote: Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. Interesting since I have never met a healthy vegetarian and human biology would indicate that this is a falsehood. What human biology would that be? I've never met an unhealthy vegetarian. The fact that our eyes are centered forward like a predator, the presence of canine teeth, the lack of a natural ability to break down plant cellulose, a single stomach instead of four... |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: /shrug. Haven't seen a study that says eating meat regularly is better for you. I have seen studies that say eating fish and/or meat on occasion is not bad. Like you say, draw your own conclusions - I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm just basing my opinion on what evidence is available, not on what I want to hear. Here is one: http://articles.cnn.com/2002-11-19/heal ... =PM:HEALTH Eat a sensible, balanced diet as nature intended. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hopwin wrote: Arathain Kelvar wrote: /shrug. Haven't seen a study that says eating meat regularly is better for you. I have seen studies that say eating fish and/or meat on occasion is not bad. Like you say, draw your own conclusions - I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm just basing my opinion on what evidence is available, not on what I want to hear. Here is one: http://articles.cnn.com/2002-11-19/heal ... =PM:HEALTH Eat a sensible, balanced diet as nature intended. Um, no? Did you read that article? It was about Atkins. That is not a sensible, balanced diet by any stretch of the imagination. Also, the article talked about potential problems with the study (fish oil) and how it's very small and states many times that more study needs to be done. So yes - it is a study that says eating more meat is good for you. No, it doesn't say it's better than being a vegetarian. No, it doesn't mean what you say it means, which is to eat a balanced diet. Last - balanced diet is a bit meaningless due to its ambiguity. Of course you should eat a balanced diet. Vegetarians should as well. They do - at least as far as the ones I have met. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I misread your question. My link to your requested study is independent of my second statement. If you have trouble figuring out what a balanced diet is that would be your problem. However, vegetarians by definition cannot eat a balanced diet since they restrict themselves to a singular type of protein, calories and carbohydrates. As to your studies: Here's a textbook by a dentist who travelled the world studying nutrition: http://astore.amazon.com/theheahomec0a- ... 0916764206 Cliffs Notes wrote: The article in Psychology Today ended on a baffled note with the author wondering if meat eating could potentially be in our genes? I submit that the results of this survey are not surprising and are in fact a testament to the research of Dr. Weston A. Price. Dr. Price traveled the world in the 1920′s and 1930′s visiting 14 isolated cultures in the process. During this adventure which he documented in great detail with amazing pictures in his masterpiece Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, Dr. Price concluded that while the diets of these natives varied widely, nutrient dense animal foods high in the fat soluble vitamins A, D, and K (also known as Activator X) were the common denominator. Consumption of these animal foods were revered in these communities as they bestowed vibrant health, ease of fertility, healthy children, and high resistance to chronic and infectious disease. This discovery was a disappointment to Dr. Price who had expected to find the vegetarian cultures to be the healthiest cultures of all. But, the vegetarian cultures he examined displayed more degeneration than the omnivore cultures which surprised him given that these vegetarian cultures did indeed have superior health than the Americans of his day. Several studies cited here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism#Longevity Another (citations on site here: http://www.healthiertalk.com/sorry-vegetarians-4182) Quote: A study focused on 572 women and 388 men from 55–92 years old living in Rancho Bernardo, California. Sorry to vegetarians who think they are eating healthy but facts are facts. For every 15-gram per day increase in animal protein intake, overall bone mineral density increased, especially in the hip, neck and spine. Yet the opposite happened with vegetable proteins. The more vegetable protein, the lower the bone mineral density.(3) The study also showed that high calcium intake did not seem to protect those who ate a lot of plant protein. The women who took in the most calcium lost bone mineral density. The simple fact is that your body can’t build bones from plants because they contain incomplete proteins. http://calorielab.com/news/2009/12/05/i ... based-one/ Quote: Furthermore, studies showing better health among vegetarians don’t reflect dietary differences alone. Studies show consistently that vegetarians as a group are more likely to be non-smokers and more physically active than non-vegetarians. Vegetarians are also less likely to be overweight. Excess body fat is strongly linked to heart disease, diabetes and cancer risk. But vegetarian eating won’t automatically lead to a healthy weight if it still includes excessive portions and foods concentrated in calories from oils and sugars. Although a vegetarian diet has a positive influence in supporting weight control, specific food choices may be the overriding influence of plant-based diets on health. Traditional Mediterranean-style eating patterns, which are plant-based diets that include fish regularly but also may include modest amounts of meat occasionally, were identified as the principal eating style tied to lower incidence of heart disease in one recent review of available data. We can go back and forth on these all day with you producing pro-vegetarian studies and me providing studies like the above. But common sense and evolutionary biology would indicate that humans are intended to be omnivorous and a healthy diet should include stuff from Column A and Column B in moderation. *shrug* |
Author: | NephyrS [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Actually, there's a decent argument out there from a biochemical perspective that says we're really still more carnivores. External features evolve faster than changes in biochemical pathways, so while our teeth and digestive track have adapted to take advantage of plant nutrients, our metabolic pathways really haven't caught up. With the strong links between carbohydrate intake and a number of disease states, it's not a hard theory to support. You can always look at an excellent "case study" in the Eskimo tribes- they were surviving great (healthy, good longevity, etc) on a completely carnivorous diet. Then the population became riddled with disease almost as soon as carbohydrates were introduced. The body can break down any of the three categories of biomolecules for energy, but of the three, fats are by far the most efficient in terms of low byproducts/high energy per unit of fuel. In a "carnivorous" system, fats are broken down for energy, which is in turn used to turn excess proteins into glucose, which the brain needs to function. The problem with taking in large amounts of carbohydrates is that our systems use them as one of the central regulatory molecules for the control of all metabolic pathways. Our system is designed such that an excess of fats and proteins leads to high blood sugar levels, and hence high blood sugar levels are a direct indicator of high protein and lipid levels. If you take in large amounts of carbohydrates directly, however, you blow that regulatory system all to hell. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:24 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Hopwin wrote: If you have trouble figuring out what a balanced diet is that would be your problem. However, vegetarians by definition cannot eat a balanced diet since they restrict themselves to a singular type of protein, calories and carbohydrates. I believe they can get anything they need without consuming meat. May require artificial supplements. Quote: But common sense and evolutionary biology would indicate that humans are intended to be omnivorous and a healthy diet should include stuff from Column A and Column B in moderation. *shrug* I agree that we are designed to be omnivores. That is obvious. Countering biology is not necessarily bad. If all required nutrients are taken in, you're good. If you can do so without taking in harmful materials, you're better off. Think the scene in the Matrix where they are all eating the mushy crap. It may taste like ***, but it's all they need. Now, you say figuring out what a "balanced diet" is is my problem. I'd counter that this is really the problem being looked into in all the studies either of us are looking at. What is the proper balance? You then bring up "moderation", which is really just another ambiguous term for balance. Even your studies above don't really address the point: meat's not that good for you. While there are lots of studies out there that say vegetarianism is ok, many of these bring up some of the issues you point out. Things to watch out for. It appears that these issues can be corrected with a very modest amount of meat. Consuming a small amount of meat is likewise consistent with our biology (only two canines, more molars, etc). Your studies support this as well. Very few support a heavy meat diet. So that gets back to the original article. One serving of meat, one serving of dairy with every meal. Even if you don't subscribe to the idea that vegetarianism is good, it seems this quantity of animal product is an excessive requirement. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
NephyrS wrote: You can always look at an excellent "case study" in the Eskimo tribes- they were surviving great (healthy, good longevity, etc) on a completely carnivorous diet. Then the population became riddled with disease almost as soon as carbohydrates were introduced. Interesting, though there may be some pieces of the puzzle missing. How many generations were they on meat only? How much of that was fish (it seems to be well documented that eating a lot of fish is better than pretty much anything else, vegetarianism or modest meat included)? Also - considering the vegetarian studies and the Atkins studies, both of which seem to show benefits, perhaps the worst thing you can do is significant carbs plus heavy meat? That seems to be the case, that it's somehow the combination that makes things worse. Quote: The problem with taking in large amounts of carbohydrates is that our systems use them as one of the central regulatory molecules for the control of all metabolic pathways. Our system is designed such that an excess of fats and proteins leads to high blood sugar levels, and hence high blood sugar levels are a direct indicator of high protein and lipid levels. If you take in large amounts of carbohydrates directly, however, you blow that regulatory system all to hell. I'm not sure that vegetarians really eat that many more carbs than other folks. From what I've seen, they eat about the same food, only replacing the meat with more fruit and vegetables. |
Author: | NephyrS [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
You must be around a lot "better" vegetarians than I am. A lot of the ones I know just load up on carbs. I tend to eat lean meat + fruits and vegetables, and try to steer away from carbs- most of the vegetarians I know would replace what I eat in meat with carbs, rather than replacing it with more fruit and vegetables. |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
NephyrS wrote: You must be around a lot "better" vegetarians than I am. A lot of the ones I know just load up on carbs. I tend to eat lean meat + fruits and vegetables, and try to steer away from carbs- most of the vegetarians I know would replace what I eat in meat with carbs, rather than replacing it with more fruit and vegetables. Me - I just eat whatever and then later say "I shouldn't have eaten that". |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
NephyrS wrote: You must be around a lot "better" vegetarians than I am. A lot of the ones I know just load up on carbs. All of the vegetarians (I include vegans in this category) I know have to eat a handful of vitamins every day to offset the nutritional disadvantage they have placed upon themselves. If you have to go outside of your own dietary restrictions to get essential vitamins and nutrients, then you are doing it wrong |
Author: | Arathain Kelvar [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hopwin wrote: NephyrS wrote: You must be around a lot "better" vegetarians than I am. A lot of the ones I know just load up on carbs. All of the vegetarians (I include vegans in this category) I know have to eat a handful of vitamins every day to offset the nutritional disadvantage they have placed upon themselves. If you have to go outside of your own dietary restrictions to get essential vitamins and nutrients, then you are doing it wrong And yet dietary supplements are recommended for just about everyone. |
Author: | Hopwin [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: And yet dietary supplements are recommended for just about everyone. By whom? I have never been told by any medical professional that I need any dietary supplements. |
Author: | Oonagh [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:48 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. |
AAAH! What Cookies aren't recommended? /shoots - Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services Hey where is the gun emoticon? Life without cookies to a pre-schooler would be like stepping on a person's hopes and dreams forever. |
Author: | Lenas [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Arathain Kelvar wrote: And yet dietary supplements are recommended for just about everyone. You know the FDA is trying to regulate vitamins, right? |
Author: | Lydiaa [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Your Lunch Sucks. Here, have some Chicken Nuggets. |
There’s a joke amongst the regulatory people that all Multivitamins are just expensive urine. While it does help in rare cases of deficiency, in majority of people it doesn't do much. Even in those rare cases where it does help, it’s only 1-2 vitamins that are actually needed, based on the person’s diet. Most regulated countries already regulate vitamins and mineral as they tend to claim a whole lot, and do mostly nothing. The US have given them a free pass as they don’t tend to pose a lot of risk, and most of the products have been on the market for a substantial amount of time (grand fathering) The reason why dietary supplements are recommended often is because it’s the easier option to try. It’s harmless to everyone, has a placebo effect, gets you off the doctor’s back for a while, and you’ll have to pay for a re-visit. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Hannibal wrote: Arathain Kelvar wrote: Interesting, considering studies have shown vegetarians live longer. I've also seen studies that smoking is good for your lungs, a Paleo diet makes you live longer, coffee enemas make you live longer, and erratic sleep cycles make you live longer. Find the conclusion you want, and I bet there is a study that will support it, and plenty more to refute it. |
Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |