Study: Countries With Best/worst Eating Habits In The World

[Chet]

Where in the article did you note that ' someone picks what they think is a 'healthy' diet' and more so, that someone tries to '...define the world by it'?

Healthy was defined in the study as a scale with tendencies, meaning some combination of '... fruits, vegetables, beans and legumes, nuts and seeds, whole grains, milk, total polyunsaturated fatty acids, fish, plant omega-3s, and dietary fibre...'.

Anything on the list you would disagree with as being 'healthy'?

They contrast that healthy list with one they call 'unhealthy'. The unhealthy list includes dietary cholesterol, and sodium. These two items in particular have been found not to cause the problems attributed to them for years yet the propaganda goes on. What will the 'experts' tell us next is particularly healthy or unhealthy? And then discover they were wrong in a few years?
When you measure stuff like this the yardstick is important.

 

[Idois]

The unhealthy list includes dietary cholesterol, and sodium. These two items in particular have been found not to cause the problems attributed to them for years yet the propaganda goes on.

Do you happen to have a link or two to peer-reviewed studies that supports your claim or is this your conclusion based on the information you have been exposed through over the years?

Could it be that the observation you are citing is not related to a faulty scientific methodology, but rather to different studies, with different methodologies being reported at different times and within different contexts, and the consuming public and journalists being left with often incorrectly interpreting the study findings and to whom the findings apply?

The systematic reviews and/or meta-analysis (i.e. the robust review of all studies available to date) do show clear and measurable adverse health effects of specified quantities of specific dietary intakes (including cholesterol and sodium), hence there is no confusion in the scientific community. I do agree with you that interpreting scientific facts and transmitting them to the general public can at times be challenging, as findings may not apply to all individuals and context equally. Nonetheless, if interpreted correctly, the findings can be very beneficial in guiding our decision-making process regarding our health and well-being.

 

[polostar88]

I eat fatty meats (though I try to take care that they're grass fed/organic), tallow, marrow, offal, lard, pastured eggs, full fat dairy, including butter. My lipid profile is perfect and has been for the last few years. All evidence is that they were lying about cholesterol and saturated fat being bad for you. Now they're starting to finally admit this.

Sweden has for some time been encouraging people to adopt a high fat/low carb diet.

A lot of what gets pushed as "healthy" food has to do with the preferences of the agricultural industry, not your health; also with a political agenda that sees an advantage in the population of first world countries getting used to living on rice & beans, soy, grains, and other inferior foodstuffs.

 

[Idois]

I eat fatty meats (though I try to take care that they're grass fed/organic), tallow, marrow, offal, lard, pastured eggs, full fat dairy, including butter. My lipid profile is perfect and has been for the last few years. All evidence is that they were lying about cholesterol and saturated fat being bad for you. Now they're starting to finally admit this. [background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]Sweden has for some time been encouraging people to adopt a high fat/low carb diet.[/background]

I have difficulty following you, sorry....could you clarify please who is 'they; in the above statement?
Are you implying that your personal experience invalidates a study?
Do you have a link to how is Sweden '...encouraging people to adap high fat/low carb diet...'? Via a health policy or is this something you picked up in the media?

 

[Chet]

http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-scientific-report/

 

[polostar88]

http://www.nytimes.c...d=tw-share&_r=0

studies which claimed to show that saturated fats, cholesterol, and sodium are bad were faulty to begin with...

A lot of the propaganda was spread by arrogant govt. and food industry officials.

 

[ElQueso]

Ever since the 70's (when I became aware of more than my toys and going to school) I've been watching experts tell us one thing one year about nutrition (not to mention every other horror that can happen, like a missing ozone layer and causing a new ice age, petroleum hitting peak production by the mid-80s, etc), and then reverse themselves some years later for the "latest".

One thing I know is that the diet I grew up with allowed my grandmother to reach a ripe old age of 92 (and she smoked most of her life), my folks are approaching 80 and still taking care of their three acres on a lake in Missouri by themselves (even after my father broke his femur in half about three months ago - it was a fall on to a car from a ladder, not a slip with low bone mass involved), my uncle in near perfect health at nearly the same age as my folks...

I know of people that followed the latest trends and are in much worse shape at various points in their lives. Not saying that listening to the experts is stupid, but putting too much stock in "common wisdom" driven by experts who are often paid for their research by some group who has an agenda isn't the be-all and end-all.

Moderate eating of even moderately good-for-you foods, accompanied by exercise and a satisfying life, will do more for you than just about any diet that experts declare to be the way to live. The rest is luck and genetics.

I still eat eggs and bacon in the morning with a nice little helping of oatmeal (cooked, not raw!)

 

[gpop]

No wonder Argentina is number 7. All that people eat here is dead animals fat, sugar and white flour.

Those dead animals, sugar and white flour were all part of a healthy diet at one time. What has changed is the way we buy those products and from whom.

Even the soil growing the food we eat today is not the same as it was 20, 50, 100, 500 years ago but we may think that is continues unchanged and not contributing to the ecosystem we had then and have now. Ancient ( and not so ancient) cultures lived healthy lives without science or progress (case-in-point, Mexico and the development of traditional corn breeds through centuries that are guarded despite the pressure of GMO domination that pressured their government to give the go-ahead for GMO production).
The bread we eat now is not the bread we ate before due to mass production and how it affected the environment that it's grown in. When did you ever hear of a DIET before the 20th century ?!?!? Entire cultures subsisted on the same food, balanced, and locally grown. The fault is not of the food but for the people making money for processing the hell out of perfectly good stock!

 

[camberiu]