|
I commend your effort, but don't even try bringing up Veganism on Hacker News. I've tried to do the same and low-carb dogma ideologues lost their minds to the point logical and evidence-based dialogue became impossible. My own theory is, there is too much emotional attachment to eating meat, dairy and eggs in Americans to consider Veganism seriously. They will perform incredible mental gymnastics to justify their violent ideology promoted and ingrained by USDA and Animal Ag. Regarding the NY Times article itself - it is the usual incoherent nonsense, citing how "USDA began recommending a high-carb, low-fat diet" as if to imply Americans then started eating whole plant foods, instead of added sugars and refined carbohydrate. Ignored also are the many studies pointing out low-carb diets are not satiating and promote weight gain and death (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), which is obvious to anyone who has had an unbiased look into Atkins "nightmare" diets [11]. Who wrote the article? None other than a "director" at an organization paid for by Laura and John D. Arnold, which have substantial ties[6] to animal agriculture industry (Another poster in this thread linked to a website trying to discredit Dr. Greger which the Arnold Foundation also paid for.) The low-carb ideologues will vehemently deny the current scientific consensus that we should derive a majority of our calories from carbohydrate (7, 8), citing flawed, biased or outright retracted research, akin to deniers of anthropogenic climate change, which is not ironic given animal agriculture also happens to be the leading cause of climate change (9). The long - and the short of it - is that humans are natural plant eaters; whole plant foods are most appropriate to our physiology (10). I, for one, am sick of the carbophobic low-carb propaganda. . https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7498104
2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20820038
3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25246449
4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19828712
5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20820038
6. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/the-money-behind-the-f...
7. http://www.fao.org/docrep/w8079e/w8079e00.htm
8. http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?Rec...
9. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6294
10. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5wfMNNr3ak
11. http://www.atkinsexposed.org/ |
1. This doesn't analyze low-carb vs. high-carb diets, it's just a study of satiety indices. The lowest satiety index foods were all high in carbs, as one would expect (croissants, cake and donuts were the bottom three) as were the highest satiety index foods (boiled potatoes). There were only 4 items on a list of 38 items that would be considered acceptable low-carb foods if you were trying to hit the keto subreddit's 20g low-carb diet (cheese, eggs, steak and fish). Everything else had a high amount of carbs, with the next highest protein foods being yoghurt, baked beans and lentils, which all contain significant amounts of carbs.
2. This study compares a low-carb animal diet to a low-carb vegetable diet, and therefore does not address the topic you described.
3. See the prior point.
4. This study compared saturated fat to monounsaturated fat, and thus does not address the question of low-carb vs. high carb diets in particular.
5. This link is a duplicate of 2, so see point 2.