Heart-Healthy Diet Doesn’t Have to be Costly

Reuter’s Health reports new research showing that spending more on food isn’t necessarily the best way to a healthy diet. Of course, that depends on what one considers to be a healthy diet. If you are like the researchers and you believe spending on nuts, soy, beans and whole grains is a great investment in your health, then I suppose that might be better than a diet relying solely on sugary foods. Sounds pretty gross when compared to a diet of all animal products, however, which is also quite affordable especially if you eat grain-finished meats as I do. A package of 73/27 ground beef is pretty cheap too and it can feed a person for several days and keep them in top form. In fact, a diet of 73/27 ground beef and water is a perfect diet for human beings. Don’t give me this crap about variety and all of that. If nothing else existed and that is all there was, we would survive just fine. Heck, we would even thrive!

Several studies suggest that living on junk food can be cheaper than eating lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, the researchers note in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Research from the UK, France, Spain, and the Netherlands has also found that eating a healthy diet costs more. However, there is some evidence that “healthy diets can be obtained at different levels of spending,” the authors write.

To compare the relationship between food spending and diet healthfulness, the team assessed diet and spending data for 78,191 women participating in the Nurses’ Health Study. They rated the women’s eating habits and multivitamin intake according to the Alternative Healthy Eating Index (AHEI), a tool they developed, with points awarded for consuming healthier items.

Can you see how rigged this “test” was and how biased their views were going into the study? These people are clearly not scientists. They are researchers masquerading as scientists. They rated people’s eating habits based on a metric that they developed, and they awarded points for consuming what they considered to be healthy items. They tried to isolate the healthier people in the Nurses’ Health Study, but we’ve already seen much bigger studies, which showed that the women who ate the higher percentage of fat in their diet were the most healthy, and that’s the bottom line. Trying to spin the data according to their narrow views is irresponsible and continues the scientific masquerade.

No one wants to eat beans, soy, and indigestible roughage. This stuff obviously leads to cancer in 1 in 2 males, and 1 in 3 females. The standard American Diet with its 70% carbohydrate to fat and protein ration has not been shown to prevent or cure anything yet these irresponsible individuals continue to tout its efficacy. Enough already. Enough with associations and risk factors which don’t mean squat. Let’s look at the hard data. Populations that don’t eat easily digestible and refined carbohydrates don’t get diseases of civilization. It’s as simple as that. There is no need to dig for some more complex explanation when the simple one will suffice.

If you want to see your health increase, stop eating animal fodder and begin eating the animals themselves.

Share on Twitter
Posted on September 24, 2010 at 11:16 pm by Charles · Permalink
In: Diet, Disease

Zeroing In On Health – The Blog! is Stephen Fry proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache