Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

FOOD PYRAMID a Crock of sh....?

hesselite

New member
I've done a lot of thinking on this topic and it seems to me that the food pyramid is a crock of sh*t. 6-11 servings of grains while only 2-3 servings of meat?? i've even seen one pyramid say "less than 6 oz. total of cooked meat". what the hell is that?? i'd DIE on 6 oz. of meat. give me steak or give me death. granted, i'm working on becoming a bodybuilder, and not your typical Joe American, but still.

i think i'm speaking on behalf of everyone here when i say that the american diet lacks some serious good clean protein. suggesting that people cut even MORE meat out of their diets is just stupid. i think all too often people associate meat with burgers and tacos... sh*tty fast foods and such.

Dr. Atkins indirectly proposes a conspiracy theory with the FDA in conjunction with the big grain producers and manufacturers (nabisco, farmers of america, keebler, etc.) in creating this pyramid.

Any input on the topic??

--Hess
 
The food pyramid is potentially very healthy for your average American (non-bodybuilder). If those servings of grain were WHOLE grain, and everybody ate 5-10 servings of fresh fruits and veggies, while keeping their sat fat intake low, then many of the diseases of western civilization would vanish, and a lot less of the tropical rainforests would be chopped down to provide meat for obese rich people. Sadly, very few Americans eat this way, and they probably never will. Instead they'll resort to desperate, last ditch, environment destroying diets such as Atkin's.

Of course bodybuilders need more protein than this, but the rest of the pyramid is also good for BBs....whole grains, lots of veggies and some healthy fats.......
 
Growing meat requires a huge amount of natural resources including topsoil, clean water and land. The infamous destruction of the world's rainforest has been blamed on McDonald's need to clear new land to raise cattle on. There is some truth to this. Poor people in developing countries are turning to cattle farming as a cash crop, even though the soils are generally poor and can't sustain many cattle. They do this instead of growing their traditional food crops, or leaving the jungles unfelled. And so on down the line (this is just the tip of the iceberg).

My reference to Atkin's diet was merely to say that any diet that encourages people to eat more meat rather than less, is environmentally and economically unfriendly. It should not be about how our ancestors ate. When we ate hunter/gatherer diets, there were between 100,000 and 1 million humans on the total planet. It is no longer sustainable to eat as if we're still roaming around in the paleolithic in small clans. Diets high in whole grains and fresh fruits and veggies are associated with lower BMI, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer etc....There is no need to eat lots of meat to remain healthy. There IS a need for people to cut the refined, processed carbs (bread, ice cream, coke, french fries...) and eat more veggies to remain healthy.
 
There is even a new book out about how the pyramid is wrong. I'm not sure of the name, but it should be near bestseller sections or the like. It has to do something with Harvard scientists findings and their new recommendations for a healthy diet.

Of course, you shouldn't just blindly follow what anyone says becuase Harvard scientists have also classified the way bodybuilders eat as a new eating disorder. So, i guess i should stop eating right and start eating fast food like the rest of America, huh?
 
Just a clip I read from from the Weston Price Foundation web-site.
Do cattle use land that should be planted with grain?
Vegetarians argue that cows and sheep require pasturage that could be better used to raise grains for starving millions in third-world countries. This argument ignores the fact that a large portion of our earth’s land is unsuited to cultivation. The open range, desert and mountainous areas yield their fruits in grazing animals. Grasslands perfectly suited to grazing cover an area in China’s interior equal to three times the entire amount of land under cultivation in the rest of the country.24 Citing the arguments of vegetarians, the Chinese government has opted for more intense cultivation of existing agricultural lands rather than development of these untapped regions in order to supply much-needed animal products to the Chinese diet.

A far more serious threat to humanity is the monoculture of grains and legumes, which tends to deplete the soil and requires the use of artificial fertilizers and pesticides. The educated consumer and the enlightened farmer together can bring about the return of the mixed farm, where cultivation of fruits and vegetables is combined with the raising of livestock and fowl in a manner that is efficient, economical and environmentally friendly. Cattle providing rich manure are the absolute basis for healthy, sustainable farming. On marginal land, wise grass feeding practices can actually improve soil quality and restore pasture land. It is not animal cultivation that leads to hunger and famine but unwise agricultural practices and monopolistic distribution systems.
 
I agree entirely with ya PwB. I'm not talking about feeding the third world, and I'm not talking about native grasslands that have been grazed for millenium. These grasslands, though vast, are still not enough to sustain a 6 billion strong world of predominantly meat eaters. Have you ever tried to muster cattle and get them to market from a high country station?? Helicopters help, but it's still not economical for export. In the real world, huge, inconceivable amounts of poor quality land have been clear-felled of native tropical and subtropical forests to graze cattle on instead. For some quick cash a lot of people in developing countries will also resort to putting cattle on their land to sell to westerners, rather than the traditional uses of that land to feed themselves directly. They can get a lot more money for the cattle, which they then turn around and spend on importing food to feed themselves. Of course, you could say that's their ignorance and hard luck, but such are economies on a world scale.

I live in a country full of sheep and cattle, much of which gets exported. It was 80% covered in forest less than a 1000 years ago. It's now got 20% forest cover. The land that is grazed is a large mixture of mountainous and plains grasses. Most of these lands are crop dusted with fertilizers, sometimes pesticides and sometimes roundup, all to sustain larger herds than could naturally be farmed. As in America, the livestock is also routinely treated with drugs to battle parasites, antibiotics and anabolic steroids to increase saleable meat.

So yes, in an ideal world, none of this would happen. We would all eat organically grown, free range meat and fruits and veggies like our ancestors did. It would be sustainable (or not and we would perish or dwindle as a species).

In the real world, especially the affluent developed countries, we actually have the power to make important choices, both personally and globally. We can continue to eat diets high up the food chain, and battle with human nature to try not to eat too much fat and refined foods so we reduce lifestyle diseases. Or we can adopt a diet that the American Heart Foundation and the Cancer Society have jointly research and endorsed, which increases fiber and phytonutrient intake, while reducing sat fats (compared to the average American diet). With a modicum of common sense, you can convert those carbs, grains and meats into whole, unprocessed (and preferably organically grown) grains, vegetables, fruits and meats, and still be a healthy bodybuilder into a ripe old age. And if you're not a bodybuilder, the benefits of the food pyramid should be even more obvious (I mean to your average fast food couch potato).
 
Top Bottom